I regard the EU as fundamentally a second order matter. Leaving is a lunatic distraction, but it will pass (albeit that as a nation we will probably be substantially poorer as a result).
But the manner of Leave's victory is one which the nation will not recover from morally for many years. Every form of minority will now become fair game for populists to vilify. Because the referendum has shown that such a strategy can work.
I have to agree with this. Leave ran an astonishingly dishonest campaign. Remain tended to exaggeration but stayed away from the outright lies of their opponents. I thought Indyref Yes was dishonest, but Leave was in another level again.
Having said that, I don't think Leavers are stupid. Arguably, Remain had an arrogance and lack of curiosity about why people would want to leave the EU, that was stupid.
So each family would be £4300 worse off was a fundamentally honest claim?
I regard the EU as fundamentally a second order matter. Leaving is a lunatic distraction, but it will pass (albeit that as a nation we will probably be substantially poorer as a result).
But the manner of Leave's victory is one which the nation will not recover from morally for many years. Every form of minority will now become fair game for populists to vilify. Because the referendum has shown that such a strategy can work.
I have to agree with this. Leave ran an astonishingly dishonest campaign. Remain tended to exaggeration but stayed away from the outright lies of their opponents
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
TBH I'm not sure. The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming. Did the public knowingly decide to accept the risks, or did they not believe them? Did we under-estimate economic confidence (voters thought they were safe to take the risk), or over-estimate it (voters thought they had nothing to lose)? Or was it different amongst different groups? Or did they knowingly prioritise sovereignty and/or immigration over economics?
Did u see prof.Curtice on election night saying only a plurality thought the economy would get worse whereas a large majority thought immigration would fall, this is similar to the underlt polling of the GE where the topline figures showed Labour ahead or level but behind hugely on leadership and the economy.
I regard the EU as fundamentally a second order matter. Leaving is a lunatic distraction, but it will pass (albeit that as a nation we will probably be substantially poorer as a result).
But the manner of Leave's victory is one which the nation will not recover from morally for many years. Every form of minority will now become fair game for populists to vilify. Because the referendum has shown that such a strategy can work.
I have to agree with this. Leave ran an astonishingly dishonest campaign. Remain tended to exaggeration but stayed away from the outright lies of their opponents
£4300.
Punishment budget.
If there is no punishment budget in the autumn then it will only because the magic money tree is loaded with fruit.
Fiji are a far better team. GB not even close to scoring.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
TBH I'm not sure. The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming. Did the public knowingly decide to accept the risks, or did they not believe them? Did we under-estimate economic confidence (voters thought they were safe to take the risk), or over-estimate it (voters thought they had nothing to lose)? Or was it different amongst different groups? Or did they knowingly prioritise sovereignty and/or immigration over economics?
I disagree about the economic arguments, you probably agreed with them because you had absolute trust on those making the arguments.
If the multiple financial and economic crisis of the past teaches us, is that those in place of authority tend to bend reality towards their personal benefits.
To put it simply, for too many times those people cried wolf in order to retain their jobs, so now no one believes them.
"Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly."
How many times in the last 30 years have those groups read it wrongly, or abused their position of trust to peddle their personal beliefs ? Think about it.
"All metrics of scientific evaluation are bound to be abused. Goodhart’s law (named after the British economist who may have been the first to announce it) states that when a feature of the economy is picked as an indicator of the economy, then it inexorably ceases to function as that indicator because people start to game it."
Is tonight one of those nights for loony Leavers to frot themselves blind as they conveniently forget that the referendum was fought and won on keeping out foreigners?
In which case, I'll check out again.
I've cut you some slack because of your sad personal news - and I hope your partner continues to improve - but I'm finding it very hard to rein it in. Hmpft.
Do us a favour, shut up, go tend your Hungarian garden. Everything you've said since the vote has been embarrassing. Shush.
Remain refuseniks should just keep their powder dry. The economy will likely contract in Q3. They can have their day in the sun at that point.
I'm content to stick with the morals rather than the economics. To make common cause with and pander to xenophobes is contemptible. That it was successful does not make it less contemptible.
I am not, however, a refusnik. The vote is cast and we just have to make the best of this moral disgrace in a manner consistent with the argument leading up to the vote.
Except Leave didn't pander to or make common cause with xenophobes which is why the xenophobes were ostracised and left with Leave.EU while the grown up Leavers went out and won it.
Turkey being an official applicant to join the EU is a matter of fact. If the EU wanted to say "no Turkey is not going to join even if it passes the acquis communitaire" it could have done so but you want to have cake and eat it too.
I think Turkey joining is a good idea like Cameron did. But then I never pretended when that became uncomfortable that it was not an issue.
... Part of the answer to why Brexit? why now? is that hundreds of thousands of people who were normally constrained by having to positively vote for someone, which they might find repugnant, had the option to vote against everything for the first time since the unpopular and forgotten AV ballot. You could vote against whatever you liked, EU immigrants, non-EU immigrants, other people getting money, and you didn't have to take the blame or endorse a hated member of the politician class. We're talking about politically alienated people who would not trust Farage any more than Corbyn. Another part of the answer is that the country's most successful politician fought with one hand self-tied behind his back in an incredibly arrogant manner - I mean in the sense that Cameron arrogantly assumed the main point of the campaign was to keep the Tory Party safe for reunification under his leadership after the substantial Remain victory. Nobody on the other side fought with that restraint.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
Except Leave didn't pander to or make common cause with xenophobes which is why the xenophobes were ostracised and left with Leave.EU while the grown up Leavers went out and won it.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
TBH I'm not sure. The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming. Did the public knowingly decide to accept the risks, or did they not believe them? Did we under-estimate economic confidence (voters thought they were safe to take the risk), or over-estimate it (voters thought they had nothing to lose)? Or was it different amongst different groups? Or did they knowingly prioritise sovereignty and/or immigration over economics?
Or perhaps they thought there was no risk, because the fundamentals guarantee the economy will go to shit at some point anyway. That's what I think. Remain sold the EU as some sort of anti-recession insurance. Which is patently absurd.
... Part of the answer to why Brexit? why now? is that hundreds of thousands of people who were normally constrained by having to positively vote for someone, which they might find repugnant, had the option to vote against everything for the first time since the unpopular and forgotten AV ballot. You could vote against whatever you liked, EU immigrants, non-EU immigrants, other people getting money, and you didn't have to take the blame or endorse a hated member of the politician class. We're talking about politically alienated people who would not trust Farage any more than Corbyn. Another part of the answer is that the country's most successful politician fought with one hand self-tied behind his back in an incredibly arrogant manner - I mean in the sense that Cameron arrogantly assumed the main point of the campaign was to keep the Tory Party safe for reunification under his leadership after the substantial Remain victory. Nobody on the other side fought with that restraint.
I am just left with this impression of the whole fiasco. Cameron: stunningly arrogant, stunningly reckless, stunningly foolish.
Yep, that's my analysis, and it's more interesting - to my mind - than the northern WWC voting OUT
Why did people like ME - prosperous southerners, with stuff to lose - vote GO?
Sovereignty but also even in the south immigration was an issue too. That said whole swathes of SouthEast England did vote Remain, from Tunbridge Wells to Guildford and West Oxfordshire to Epsom
This map of voting is fascinating. Generally, richer areas voted REMAIN, but not always.
Some LEAVE votes are intriguingly intense and decisive. North Devon: 57 to 43 LEAVE. Dorset: universally LEAVE. Etc.
SeanT is right that the map is fascinating. Basically because it's a good proxy for the UK socio-cultural divide.
For example, the hinterland of Cambridge, as well as Cambridge, being 'Remainy'. Plus Bristol, Exeter, Bath, Brighton, Norwich, Oxford, Cardiff and Manchester.
All places that are very left-liberal, yuppie, new worldy, hippy, internationalist, and middle class/graduatey.
I fear Winchester may be going that way too.
A good chunk of the commuter belt too - like Tunbridge Wells, Guildford, Thames Valley and St. Albans. But not all, and not everywhere. Probably status quo voters.
But, anyway, I've never felt as estranged from my own peer group as I have after this vote.
Interested to hear if you experienced the same as me, CR. In the days after I was often referred to as 'my only Leaver friend' - I generally corrected that to 'your only winning friend'. But more seriously, people turned to me as a counsellor, reassurer of the future, guide to a Britain my peers no longer understood, rather than as a figure of hate.
I was, a few moaners who were mid house sale (all completed, incidentally) aside, very very impressed with my friends. A few on here are the only people I know who won't accept the result....
I do not know anyone who voted Leave. If I knew someone, I would not keep any sort of relationship with him/her.
LOL.
Farage was right when he said Brexit was a victory for decent people. The referendum has exposed the Europhiles utter contempt for democracy.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
The FTSE 100 rose mostly because of the devaluation of the pound.
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
The writing was on the wall for years, but many chose to ignore it
For example, UKIP won the 2014 EU elections. This is a weather vane of sorts.
In 2014 UKIP were indeed the largest party, but the vote was only 28%. Even adding in half the tories it is only 40% of a low turnout election for Leave.
In 2014 the majority of Britons voted for parties of Remain.
I regard the EU as fundamentally a second order matter. Leaving is a lunatic distraction, but it will pass (albeit that as a nation we will probably be substantially poorer as a result).
But the manner of Leave's victory is one which the nation will not recover from morally for many years. Every form of minority will now become fair game for populists to vilify. Because the referendum has shown that such a strategy can work.
I have to agree with this. Leave ran an astonishingly dishonest campaign. Remain tended to exaggeration but stayed away from the outright lies of their opponents
£4300.
Punishment budget.
As conjecture in a Treasury report it is what it is. Actually I think a 6% relative contraction by 2030 is very plausible. We have a 2% contraction pretty much nailed on in the next two years and even that makes optimistic assumptions. Mr Osborne shouldn't have presented it as a headline and a statement of fact in a poster, without making it clear it was conjecture
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
The FTSE 100 rose mostly because of the devaluation of the pound.
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
There is a lot of shorting the pound going on.
The FTSE 250 is at its highest level for over a year - so is the 350 and the S&P 500.
The writing was on the wall for years, but many chose to ignore it
For example, UKIP won the 2014 EU elections. This is a weather vane of sorts.
I think it became a majority view since 1991 and the mess over the Maastricht treaty. Certainly after the ERM disaster in 1992, which proved that european integration was harmful for the economy.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
The FTSE 100 rose mostly because of the devaluation of the pound.
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
There is a lot of shorting the pound going on.
The FTSE 250 is at its highest level for over a year.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
TBH I'm not sure. The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming. Did the public knowingly decide to accept the risks, or did they not believe them? Did we under-estimate economic confidence (voters thought they were safe to take the risk), or over-estimate it (voters thought they had nothing to lose)? Or was it different amongst different groups? Or did they knowingly prioritise sovereignty and/or immigration over economics?
I'm not sure there are useful answers to any of those questions. I cannot for a moment believe that the electorate had any expertise on the alternative scenarios open to the UK in the event of Brexit, anymore than I believe they understood the overall direction of travel of the EU as a whole had we voted Remain.
Given that most of us here are partisan one way or another, it's hard to be dispassionate. I've said before, I thought both campaigns were terrible - mendacity was the order of the day.
We're wise to be skeptical of post-ref surveys - for all we know the population voted to deport all the Romanians and then claimed concerns for sovereignty after the event.
If we're prepared to take recent surveys at face value, it appears that control (with immigration in second place) was the highest concern.
The TUC survey showed that those polled expected Leave to hit their finances, so I don't think it was ignorance. My personal sense (just from talking with friends and family) was that the economic claims were so overblown they lost credibility.
We can't blame people for not being receptive to the economic arguments. They were couched in language that was inaccessible to laypeople.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
The FTSE 100 rose mostly because of the devaluation of the pound.
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
There is a lot of shorting the pound going on.
The FTSE 250 is at its highest level for over a year.
Equities are rallying in anticipation of more QE, rate cuts, unconventional measures etc.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The funny thing is, England historically always has done well with that kind of crap foisted on them by Oxbridge. Oxbridge rules and, indeed, the outcome of the referendum is effectively to give more control to Oxbridge, the United States, and perhaps China.
Then the question becomes, why did it happen this time? I wrote beforehand that it was hard to think of this kind of reaction against the government, the opposition, and the top runners of the country being voted for in England. Certainly not since the elections of the first two Labour ministries in the 1920s, and only in 1929 on a plurality of the vote. What was it about the campaign that was different this time? I do believe it was a mixture of sovereignty and immigration, and one cannot simply handwave away the immigration aspect of the campaign and ascribe the outcome solely to dry theoretical concepts of Westphalian statehood or romantic memories.
No. They can live with them dominating politics and media but they won't stand for being effectively called rascist and stupid.
Secondly my point is about why people missed the possibility of Leave winning. It wasn't picked up because many people kept quiet. I believe that the tone that you had to have some kind of bad soul or were frankly stupid if you thought about voting Leave did quieten many of the population prior to getting to the polling station. If I am to take one or two conversations that I had with people, you literally felt like you'd have to really justify yourself. It was like 'Voting Leave? How come? ' Its alright for me, I'll quite happily tell people why I did and I'll fight my corner but for many others its just easier to say nowt and do your business with the pencil.
I remember listening to Radio 5Live just as the polls closed and they interviewed a two or three don't knows that they followed through the campaign and they solidly ended up voting Leave. The main reason proffered? Loss of control over the government, laws and control of their country. It was a liberal democratic argument for the nation state.
So yes we can have our Oxbridge types governing but we can turf them out and put another bunch in who might do better. That matters, it always mattered.
I regard the EU as fundamentally a second order matter. Leaving is a lunatic distraction, but it will pass (albeit that as a nation we will probably be substantially poorer as a result).
But the manner of Leave's victory is one which the nation will not recover from morally for many years. Every form of minority will now become fair game for populists to vilify. Because the referendum has shown that such a strategy can work.
I have to agree with this. Leave ran an astonishingly dishonest campaign. Remain tended to exaggeration but stayed away from the outright lies of their opponents
£4300.
Punishment budget.
As conjecture in a Treasury report it is what it is. Actually I think a 6% relative contraction by 2030 is very plausible. We have a 2% contraction pretty much nailed on in the next two years and even that makes optimistic assumptions. Mr Osborne shouldn't have presented it as a headline and a statement of fact in a poster, without making it clear it was conjecture
No, it was a total lie. For one thing the denominator on the calculation was wrong, and for another they claimed it as "worse off" not "better off by less".
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
The FTSE 100 rose mostly because of the devaluation of the pound.
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
There is a lot of shorting the pound going on.
The FTSE 250 is at its highest level for over a year.
Equities are rallying in anticipation of more QE, rate cuts, unconventional measures etc.
No the FTSE 250 shouldn't be rallying because of rate cuts and QE as that means a weak sterling.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
The FTSE 100 rose mostly because of the devaluation of the pound.
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
There is a lot of shorting the pound going on.
The FTSE 250 is at its highest level for over a year.
Equities are rallying in anticipation of more QE, rate cuts, unconventional measures etc.
Yet nobody predicted that would happen after a Leave vote.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
The FTSE 100 rose mostly because of the devaluation of the pound.
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
There is a lot of shorting the pound going on.
The FTSE 250 is at its highest level for over a year.
Equities are rallying in anticipation of more QE, rate cuts, unconventional measures etc.
No the FTSE 250 shouldn't be rallying because of rate cuts and QE as that means a weak sterling.
Printed money chasing assets. - Investors forced out along the risk curve - it's the story of the past seven years.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
Outstandingly good question: well-focussed, that man.
OK, one obvious one is that the mean absolute error for referenda in the UK is a f**k of a lot bigger than that for general elections - enormously so, in fact.. The MAE for Euro16 ranged from about 2 to about 12: the acceptable limit for UKGEs is about 2-2.5 (1992 and 2015 GEs had MAEs of about 2.25-2.75).. This is not surprising: the AV referendum and ScotIndy also had some polls with >10 MAEs, but because the winning margins for both were over 10%, nobody noticed.
From a betting POV, I think this means the polls for GE2020 will be more accurate than punters believe, and betting behavior will be even more skewed than usual, leading to potentially greater profit for us in PB.com.
I like to think that Euro16 finally killed the canard that betting odds are a good predictor, but I fear that some dumb f**k will say "but of course they're more accurate, because it's their own money" and for the good of the country I will have to have them killed. It's for the best.
That is a very interesting result considering it was Nicola Sturgeon's Dad who was SNP candidate, obviously couldn't get the party faithful out to vote.
... Part of the answer to why Brexit? why now? is that hundreds of thousands of people who were normally constrained by having to positively vote for someone, which they might find repugnant, had the option to vote against everything for the first time since the unpopular and forgotten AV ballot. You could vote against whatever you liked, EU immigrants, non-EU immigrants, other people getting money, and you didn't have to take the blame or endorse a hated member of the politician class. We're talking about politically alienated people who would not trust Farage any more than Corbyn. Another part of the answer is that the country's most successful politician fought with one hand self-tied behind his back in an incredibly arrogant manner - I mean in the sense that Cameron arrogantly assumed the main point of the campaign was to keep the Tory Party safe for reunification under his leadership after the substantial Remain victory. Nobody on the other side fought with that restraint.
I am just left with this impression of the whole fiasco. Cameron: stunningly arrogant, stunningly reckless, stunningly foolish.
Whatever you think of Remain versus Leave: He set himself three significant goals in his premiership, namely to promote the Big Society, to dispel the deficit and to keep the UK in the European Union. The first was buried in a bog and the other two were miserable failures. I think he will be remembered as a prime minister who couldn't positively achieve much but who didn't overly burden comfortably-off people with hard choices.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
The FTSE 100 rose mostly because of the devaluation of the pound.
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
There is a lot of shorting the pound going on.
The FTSE 250 is at its highest level for over a year.
Equities are rallying in anticipation of more QE, rate cuts, unconventional measures etc.
Yet nobody predicted that would happen after a Leave vote.
Yes. The Brexit equity crash was the greatest bear trap I have ever seen.
I regard the EU as fundamentally a second order matter. Leaving is a lunatic distraction, but it will pass (albeit that as a nation we will probably be substantially poorer as a result).
But the manner of Leave's victory is one which the nation will not recover from morally for many years. Every form of minority will now become fair game for populists to vilify. Because the referendum has shown that such a strategy can work.
I have to agree with this. Leave ran an astonishingly dishonest campaign. Remain tended to exaggeration but stayed away from the outright lies of their opponents
£4300.
Punishment budget.
As conjecture in a Treasury report it is what it is. Actually I think a 6% relative contraction by 2030 is very plausible. We have a 2% contraction pretty much nailed on in the next two years and even that makes optimistic assumptions. Mr Osborne shouldn't have presented it as a headline and a statement of fact in a poster, without making it clear it was conjecture
It wasn't even conjecture it was an outright barefaced lie.
The conjecture was a 6% fall in GDP between the scenarios. But how did we get the £4300 figure when a 6% fall in family income between the figures would be considerably less?
Family income is a fraction of total GDP. Dividing GDP by number of families was about unheard.of fabrication.
Except Leave didn't pander to or make common cause with xenophobes which is why the xenophobes were ostracised and left with Leave.EU while the grown up Leavers went out and won it.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
TBH I'm not sure. The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming. Did the public knowingly decide to accept the risks, or did they not believe them? Did we under-estimate economic confidence (voters thought they were safe to take the risk), or over-estimate it (voters thought they had nothing to lose)? Or was it different amongst different groups? Or did they knowingly prioritise sovereignty and/or immigration over economics?
The "Conservative" party leader was campaigning in favour of Remain, but Leave was actually the more "conservative" option. Remain would have meant ever-closer Union & the eventual disappearance of the British nation state.
Personally, I didn't expect a majority of British voters to understand ever-closer Union & I expected them to consider Remain to be the apparent status quo option.
So, I think the results of the referendum were actually in line with other referendum results (like the Scottish Independence vote or the New Zealand flag referendum) where people tend to be more likely to choose the conservative & status quo option.
Yep, that's my analysis, and it's more interesting - to my mind - than the northern WWC voting OUT
Why did people like ME - prosperous southerners, with stuff to lose - vote GO?
Sovereignty but also even in the south immigration was an issue too. That said whole swathes of SouthEast England did vote Remain, from Tunbridge Wells to Guildford and West Oxfordshire to Epsom
This map of voting is fascinating. Generally, richer areas voted REMAIN, but not always.
Some LEAVE votes are intriguingly intense and decisive. North Devon: 57 to 43 LEAVE. Dorset: universally LEAVE. Etc.
SeanT is right that the map is fascinating. Basically because it's a good proxy for the UK socio-cultural divide.
For example, the hinterland of Cambridge, as well as Cambridge, being 'Remainy'. Plus Bristol, Exeter, Bath, Brighton, Norwich, Oxford, Cardiff and Manchester.
All places that are very left-liberal, yuppie, new worldy, hippy, internationalist, and middle class/graduatey.
I fear Winchester may be going that way too.
A good chunk of the commuter belt too - like Tunbridge Wells, Guildford, Thames Valley and St. Albans. But not all, and not everywhere. Probably status quo voters.
But, anyway, I've never felt as estranged from my own peer group as I have after this vote.
Interested to hear if you experienced the same as me, CR. In the days after I was often referred to as 'my only Leaver friend' - I generally corrected that to 'your only winning friend'. But more seriously, people turned to me as a counsellor, reassurer of the future, guide to a Britain my peers no longer understood, rather than as a figure of hate.
I was, a few moaners who were mid house sale (all completed, incidentally) aside, very very impressed with my friends. A few on here are the only people I know who won't accept the result....
I do not know anyone who voted Leave. If I knew someone, I would not keep any sort of relationship with him/her.
LOL.
Farage was right when he said Brexit was a victory for decent people. The referendum has exposed the Europhiles utter contempt for democracy.
Not to mention that the only Labour voting area in Surbiton probably voted Leave.
I regard the EU as fundamentally a second order matter. Leaving is a lunatic distraction, but it will pass (albeit that as a nation we will probably be substantially poorer as a result).
But the manner of Leave's victory is one which the nation will not recover from morally for many years. Every form of minority will now become fair game for populists to vilify. Because the referendum has shown that such a strategy can work.
I have to agree with this. Leave ran an astonishingly dishonest campaign. Remain tended to exaggeration but stayed away from the outright lies of their opponents
£4300.
Punishment budget.
As conjecture in a Treasury report it is what it is. Actually I think a 6% relative contraction by 2030 is very plausible. We have a 2% contraction pretty much nailed on in the next two years and even that makes optimistic assumptions. Mr Osborne shouldn't have presented it as a headline and a statement of fact in a poster, without making it clear it was conjecture
The presentation was dreadful. You're one of the first people I've seen use it correctly - a shortfall rather than an absolute contraction. The IFS plumped for a 4% shortfall if its WTO, 1.8% (IIRC) if it's a CETA-like FTA or 2.1% for EEA.
There are two issues with this. Firstly, forgone wealth doesn't have the same impact as lost wealth. I hope that's obvious. Secondly, it's hard to sell a reduction in trend growth by 0.4% (Treasury) to 0.1% (FTA) as a huge deal to ordinary folk.
The reason for that is, I hope, also obvious. The differences in regional wealth are so large, that 6% over 14 years is literally noise. London has 240% higher GDP/capita than Wales.
The fact that WTO would devastate certain sectors of the UK economy is much more powerful, but was never deployed.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
The FTSE 100 rose mostly because of the devaluation of the pound.
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
There is a lot of shorting the pound going on.
The FTSE 250 is at its highest level for over a year.
Equities are rallying in anticipation of more QE, rate cuts, unconventional measures etc.
Yet nobody predicted that would happen after a Leave vote.
I did. I am about £10 000 up in my ISA and SIPP. I dumped my shares most vulnerable to Brexit such as the housebuilders, shifted my investments to shares earning in forex and am sitting pretty. The interest rate cut and QE will push the values of these assets up further over the next year, at least as measured in Sterling.
With the extra £350 million per week for the NHS and a secure job for myself, life is pretty good for foxy!
I regard the EU as fundamentally a second order matter. Leaving is a lunatic distraction, but it will pass (albeit that as a nation we will probably be substantially poorer as a result).
But the manner of Leave's victory is one which the nation will not recover from morally for many years. Every form of minority will now become fair game for populists to vilify. Because the referendum has shown that such a strategy can work.
I have to agree with this. Leave ran an astonishingly dishonest campaign. Remain tended to exaggeration but stayed away from the outright lies of their opponents
£4300.
Punishment budget.
As conjecture in a Treasury report it is what it is. Actually I think a 6% relative contraction by 2030 is very plausible. We have a 2% contraction pretty much nailed on in the next two years and even that makes optimistic assumptions. Mr Osborne shouldn't have presented it as a headline and a statement of fact in a poster, without making it clear it was conjecture
It wasn't even conjecture it was an outright barefaced lie.
The conjecture was a 6% fall in GDP between the scenarios. But how did we get the £4300 figure when a 6% fall in family income between the figures would be considerably less?
Family income is a fraction of total GDP. Dividing GDP by number of families was about unheard.of fabrication.
But even if it had been a valid calculation, it would have been rendered invalid by using the current number of households as the denominator instead of the future number.
... Part of the answer to why Brexit? why now? is that hundreds of thousands of people who were normally constrained by having to positively vote for someone, which they might find repugnant, had the option to vote against everything for the first time since the unpopular and forgotten AV ballot. You could vote against whatever you liked, EU immigrants, non-EU immigrants, other people getting money, and you didn't have to take the blame or endorse a hated member of the politician class. We're talking about politically alienated people who would not trust Farage any more than Corbyn. Another part of the answer is that the country's most successful politician fought with one hand self-tied behind his back in an incredibly arrogant manner - I mean in the sense that Cameron arrogantly assumed the main point of the campaign was to keep the Tory Party safe for reunification under his leadership after the substantial Remain victory. Nobody on the other side fought with that restraint.
I am just left with this impression of the whole fiasco. Cameron: stunningly arrogant, stunningly reckless, stunningly foolish.
Whatever you think of Remain versus Leave: He set himself three significant goals in his premiership, namely to promote the Big Society, to dispel the deficit and to keep the UK in the European Union. The first was buried in a bog and the other two were miserable failures. I think he will be remembered as a prime minister who couldn't positively achieve much but who didn't overly burden comfortably-off people with hard choices.
I loved this from Janen Ganesh in the FT:
"There is a place for class prejudice if it is done properly. Resent privileged Conservatives, for instance, but resent them for the right reason. They are not hostile to poor people. Their sin is more often casualness, a vision of politics as a parlour game to be played with old college friends. If it goes wrong, well, you win some, you lose some. There is no malice here, just the frivolity of people unmarked by life.
David Cameron spent his last parliamentary session as prime minister holding up cat photos and chuckling like a man who had just lost a rugby-club drinking contest, not a referendum on Europe. He then decorated with official honours various losers from the Remain campaign and so many of his own advisers as to make you wonder what, short of inadvertently sitting on the nuclear button, a staffer had to do to not make the cut. "
I did. I am about £10 000 up in my ISA and SIPP. I dumped my shares most vulnerable to Brexit such as the housebuilders, shifted my investments to shares earning in forex and am sitting pretty. The interest rate cut and QE will push the values of these assets up further over the next year, at least as measured in Sterling.
With the extra £350 million per week for the NHS and a secure job for myself, life is pretty good for foxy!
What's your prediction for GBP/USD for Decenber 31st 2016? I've just opened a UK USD account and I'm wondering how much to put in it.
That is a very interesting result considering it was Nicola Sturgeon's Dad who was SNP candidate, obviously couldn't get the party faithful out to vote.
No figures kicking about yet, so wonder if it was won on the 2nd preferences. Certainly a surprising result, given it was Robin Sturgeon.
I regard the EU as fundamentally a second order matter. Leaving is a lunatic distraction, but it will pass (albeit that as a nation we will probably be substantially poorer as a result).
But the manner of Leave's victory is one which the nation will not recover from morally for many years. Every form of minority will now become fair game for populists to vilify. Because the referendum has shown that such a strategy can work.
I have to agree with this. Leave ran an astonishingly dishonest campaign. Remain tended to exaggeration but stayed away from the outright lies of their opponents
£4300.
Punishment budget.
If there is no punishment budget in the autumn then it will only because the magic money tree is loaded with fruit.
Fiji are a far better team. GB not even close to scoring.
We were told it would require an *emergency* budget, implying it couldn't wait until the Autumn:
The writing was on the wall for years, but many chose to ignore it
For example, UKIP won the 2014 EU elections. This is a weather vane of sorts.
In 2014 UKIP were indeed the largest party, but the vote was only 28%. Even adding in half the tories it is only 40% of a low turnout election for Leave.
In 2014 the majority of Britons voted for parties of Remain.
But this makes the mistake of assuming that Labour voters agree with their party's position on Europe. Or on a lot of things really. The 'Working-class-voters-not-doing-what-the-Labour-Party-want' meme is causing a lot of angst in the media, who, with some notable exceptions, still don't really grasp it as anything but a passing fad. Having spent the last 20 years poring scorn on the white working class, many middle class lefties are rather surprised to find that the WWC doesnt much care for them either. They may continue to vote Labour, as a least unpalatable option, but that shouldn't be confused for having anything at all in common with their views and values.
Watching Faisal Islam's Out and Proud about Brexit.
...
The Sast which had the biggest margins for Leave and which won it for Brexit
Yes, y its most populous region: southern England.
It.
Yep, that's my analysis, and it's more interesting - to my mind - than the northern WWC voting OUT
Why did people like ME - prosperous southerners, with stuff to lose - vote GO?
Sover
This map of voting is fascinating
Lol @ Bradford voting Leave.
SeanT
Basically areas with lots of graduates and which were reasonably well off voted Remain, areas with lots of working class voters and which were have not done so well out of the country's prosperity voted Leave
Indeed there was a far greater class divide in the EU referendum than there was at the last general election.
But I think that's an oversimplification that papers over the cracks of a lot of nuances, and draws the wrong conclusions.
Too easy to fall into a trap of wealthy/educated = Remain, and poor/stupid = Leave.
Which many people do fall into, willingly, of course. Particularly Remainers.
I was struck by the TUC's 35-64 ABC1 split which was 51:46 to Remain. These are the people with the most to lose - mortgages, kids at their most expensive, careers peaking. I would have expected them to break much more heavily for Remain.
Quite, I think there was a significant vote on sovereignty by richer, better educated people. Which us being studiously ignored by the media, who want to paint Brexit as a UKIP wwc revolt in the north.
I don't blame journalists for this. It's a neat and colourful narrative - the peasants rebellion! Lots of guys in tatts in Burnley! - as a journalist you always need that angle. But it's not the whole truth, not even near.
Rich or poor, I do not know. But there was a direct correlation between educational attainment and voting Remain. It is a fact that cannot be ignored.
People who have to work for a living voted Remain. People on benefits and pensioners voted Leave.
So 52% of the country are on benefits or pensioners?
I mean a majority of the 2 sections. But you knew that.
I believe Team GB are ahead of 2012 pace on total medals, but in 2012 the following few comparable days the rate of medal winning became insane.
Yes, I don't think we're gonna match those crucial days, by any means
But my initial predix of high single digit golds was probably pessimistic. I'd say: 10-15 is likely. Which is still jolly good and will put us in the lower reaches of the top 10
I'll go for high teens/low twenties. We have three very good chances for golds tomorrow - two Rowing (one pretty much nailed on, the other looking good) and Men's Team Pursuit Cycling. Probably silver in the horse dancing unless the Germans fall over.
I did. I am about £10 000 up in my ISA and SIPP. I dumped my shares most vulnerable to Brexit such as the housebuilders, shifted my investments to shares earning in forex and am sitting pretty. The interest rate cut and QE will push the values of these assets up further over the next year, at least as measured in Sterling.
With the extra £350 million per week for the NHS and a secure job for myself, life is pretty good for foxy!
What's your prediction for GBP/USD for Decenber 31st 2016? I've just opened a UK USD account and I'm wondering how much to put in it.
Not for me. While I think it very likely for Hillary to win there is the possibility of a Trump win. This combined with the overvaluation of the US stockmarket does not look attractive to me.
I have diversified wider. Some in Dollar earning assets, some in Euro and CHF earning assets and some earning in China and the Far East (ex Japan). Big Pharma and consumer goods with solid brands mostly.
China is not looking so dismal as last year, but does have a way to go. It is also particularly exposed to a trade war with the USA.
I am just left with this impression of the whole fiasco. Cameron: stunningly arrogant, stunningly reckless, stunningly foolish.
Whatever you think of Remain versus Leave: He set himself three significant goals in his premiership, namely to promote the Big Society, to dispel the deficit and to keep the UK in the European Union. The first was buried in a bog and the other two were miserable failures. I think he will be remembered as a prime minister who couldn't positively achieve much but who didn't overly burden comfortably-off people with hard choices.
I loved this from Janen Ganesh in the FT:
"There is a place for class prejudice if it is done properly. Resent privileged Conservatives, for instance, but resent them for the right reason. They are not hostile to poor people. Their sin is more often casualness, a vision of politics as a parlour game to be played with old college friends. If it goes wrong, well, you win some, you lose some. There is no malice here, just the frivolity of people unmarked by life.
David Cameron spent his last parliamentary session as prime minister holding up cat photos and chuckling like a man who had just lost a rugby-club drinking contest, not a referendum on Europe. He then decorated with official honours various losers from the Remain campaign and so many of his own advisers as to make you wonder what, short of inadvertently sitting on the nuclear button, a staffer had to do to not make the cut. "
Farage, for all his faults (it's a list), cared deeply about the UK's membership of the EU and that passion kept him going for over 20 years, thru the Kilroy-Silk debacle, the helicopter crash, and a bad back
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
The FTSE 100 rose mostly because of the devaluation of the pound.
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
There is a lot of shorting the pound going on.
The FTSE 250 is at its highest level for over a year.
Equities are rallying in anticipation of more QE, rate cuts, unconventional measures etc.
Yet nobody predicted that would happen after a Leave vote.
I did. I am about £10 000 up in my ISA and SIPP. I dumped my shares most vulnerable to Brexit such as the housebuilders, shifted my investments to shares earning in forex and am sitting pretty. The interest rate cut and QE will push the values of these assets up further over the next year, at least as measured in Sterling.
With the extra £350 million per week for the NHS and a secure job for myself, life is pretty good for foxy!
Congrats.
But you realise that there are untold numbers of City 'experts' who get paid a fortune and who predicted the opposite.
I did. I am about £10 000 up in my ISA and SIPP. I dumped my shares most vulnerable to Brexit such as the housebuilders, shifted my investments to shares earning in forex and am sitting pretty. The interest rate cut and QE will push the values of these assets up further over the next year, at least as measured in Sterling.
With the extra £350 million per week for the NHS and a secure job for myself, life is pretty good for foxy!
What's your prediction for GBP/USD for Decenber 31st 2016? I've just opened a UK USD account and I'm wondering how much to put in it.
IMF (as of July) think the £ is still overvalued by 5-20% ,which is a pretty large window.
I did. I am about £10 000 up in my ISA and SIPP. I dumped my shares most vulnerable to Brexit such as the housebuilders, shifted my investments to shares earning in forex and am sitting pretty. The interest rate cut and QE will push the values of these assets up further over the next year, at least as measured in Sterling.
With the extra £350 million per week for the NHS and a secure job for myself, life is pretty good for foxy!
What's your prediction for GBP/USD for Decenber 31st 2016? I've just opened a UK USD account and I'm wondering how much to put in it.
Not for me. While I think it very likely for Hillary to win there is the possibility of a Trump win. This combined with the overvaluation of the US stockmarket does not look attractive to me.
I have diversified wider. Some in Dollar earning assets, some in Euro and CHF earning assets and some earning in China and the Far East (ex Japan). Big Pharma and consumer goods with solid brands mostly.
China is not looking so dismal as last year, but does have a way to go. It is also particularly exposed to a trade war with the USA.
Fair dos, but I can't diversify that much. I can do two, maybe three currencies, but that's it.
The writing was on the wall for years, but many chose to ignore it
For example, UKIP won the 2014 EU elections. This is a weather vane of sorts.
In 2014 UKIP were indeed the largest party, but the vote was only 28%. Even adding in half the tories it is only 40% of a low turnout election for Leave.
In 2014 the majority of Britons voted for parties of Remain.
But this makes the mistake of assuming that Labour voters agree with their party's position on Europe. Or on a lot of things really. The 'Working-class-voters-not-doing-what-the-Labour-Party-want' meme is causing a lot of angst in the media, who, with some notable exceptions, still don't really grasp it as anything but a passing fad. Having spent the last 20 years poring scorn on the white working class, many middle class lefties are rather surprised to find that the WWC doesnt much care for them either. They may continue to vote Labour, as a least unpalatable option, but that shouldn't be confused for having anything at all in common with their views and values.
Yet what little and flimsy evidence there is suggests that most Labour voters voted to Remain. To be honest, I have seen more of this "middle-class left hate and fear other people" virtue signalling post-Brexit than "stupid-poor-Leavers" virtue signalling from the other side. After all, the other side has a much easier target that always takes their blame: the Tories.
The writing was on the wall for years, but many chose to ignore it
For example, UKIP won the 2014 EU elections. This is a weather vane of sorts.
In 2014 UKIP were indeed the largest party, but the vote was only 28%. Even adding in half the tories it is only 40% of a low turnout election for Leave.
In 2014 the majority of Britons voted for parties of Remain.
But this makes the mistake of assuming that Labour voters agree with their party's position on Europe. Or on a lot of things really. The 'Working-class-voters-not-doing-what-the-Labour-Party-want' meme is causing a lot of angst in the media, who, with some notable exceptions, still don't really grasp it as anything but a passing fad. Having spent the last 20 years poring scorn on the white working class, many middle class lefties are rather surprised to find that the WWC doesnt much care for them either. They may continue to vote Labour, as a least unpalatable option, but that shouldn't be confused for having anything at all in common with their views and values.
I am sure that you are right (though the WWC is not as intolerant and narrow minded as some on here would claim. The 35% of 65+ C2DE's for example who voted Remain are a group meriting further investigation).
I suspect that the people who voted Lab in the Euro's were not Leavers, as those would mostly already have switched to the kippers.
Portsmouth, 75 to 13 Clacton, 49 to 21 Enfield North, 88 to 40 Sevenoaks Bedford Elmet and Rothwell, 68 to 32 Wellingborough Blackley and Broughton, 74 to 15 Solihull Halesowen and Rowley Regis Mid Worcestershire Hyndburn South East Cambridgeshire Winchester, 86 to 35 South Ribble
Smith
Twickenham, 76 to 70 Glasgow Cathcart Ealing Central Ayl
A question: given that the number of people eligible to participate in such meetings increased by roughly 50% on Monday, were all those newly eligible given notice of the meetings, let alone adequate required notice?
A second question: given that previous nominations have been made by excluding members the High Court has now said can participate in the election, are all those previous nominations invalid?
And a third: What on earth happens if on Friday the Appeal Court takes us back to square one? Other than CLP Secretaries jumping out of the window at the sheer administrative chaos of it all.
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming.
You might have thought so at the time but that was from your perspective. Everyone has their own perspective based upon their experiences and personal circumstances and for many millions (including many who voted Remain) the weight of economic arguments certainly wasn't absolutely overwhelming for Remain.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
The FTSE 100 rose mostly because of the devaluation of the pound.
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
There is a lot of shorting the pound going on.
The FTSE 250 is at its highest level for over a year.
Equities are rallying in anticipation of more QE, rate cuts, unconventional measures etc.
Yet nobody predicted that would happen after a Leave vote.
I did. I am about £10 000 up in my ISA and SIPP. I dumped my shares most vulnerable to Brexit such as the housebuilders, shifted my investments to shares earning in forex and am sitting pretty. The interest rate cut and QE will push the values of these assets up further over the next year, at least as measured in Sterling.
With the extra £350 million per week for the NHS and a secure job for myself, life is pretty good for foxy!
Congrats.
But you realise that there are untold numbers of City 'experts' who get paid a fortune and who predicted the opposite.
They bet on the wrong horse.
When the exit polls came out I thought that I might have over done it, but my caution was vindicated.
IMF (as of July) think the £ is still overvalued by 5-20% ,which is a pretty large window.
That's not strictly an answer, but I'll take it, thank you. I think the best option for currency transfer would be something like Tramonex, which takes a cut of about 1.5% (so if you convert GBP to USD and straight back to GBP, you'd lose about 3%). But if GBP declines a further 5-20%, it's going to be worth it.
This is not going to be a happy few years for fiscal conservatives...
Watching Faisal Islam's Out and Proud about Brexit.
...
The Sast which had the biggest margins for Leave and which won it for Brexit
Yes, y its most populous region: southern England.
It.
Yep, that's my analysis, and it's more interesting - to my mind - than the northern WWC voting OUT
Why did people like ME - prosperous southerners, with stuff to lose - vote GO?
Sover
This map of voting is fascinating
Lol @ Bradford voting Leave.
SeanT
Basically areas with lots of graduates and which were reasonably well off voted Remain, areas with lots of working class voters and which were have not done so well out of the country's prosperity voted Leave
Indeed there was a far greater class divide in the EU referendum than there was at the last general election.
But I think that's an oversimplification that papers over the cracks of a lot of nuances, and draws the wrong conclusions.
Too easy to fall into a trap of wealthy/educated = Remain, and poor/stupid = Leave.
Which many people do fall into, willingly, of course. Particularly Remainers.
I was struck by the TUC's 35-64 ABC1 split which was 51:46 to Remain. ....
Quite, ....
I don't blame journalists for this. It's a neat and colourful narrative - the peasants rebellion! Lots of guys in tatts in Burnley! - as a journalist you always need that angle. But it's not the whole truth, not even near.
Rich or poor, I do not know. But there was a direct correlation between educational attainment and voting Remain. It is a fact that cannot be ignored.
People who have to work for a living voted Remain. People on benefits and pensioners voted Leave.
So 52% of the country are on benefits or pensioners?
I mean a majority of the 2 sections. But you knew that.
Of course - just as I know that far more people these days get (useless) university degrees than they did in the 1960s and earlier - so waving graduation as 'the clever voted remain' is a load of bullshit.
Unionist votes swing directly to Con. Lib Dems on the ropes.
No tactical Unionist voting, are Labour even trying to get Tory votes?
I doubt it, but right wing Labour types are moving away it seems. Also looks like Tories are using their lower preferences to pick other unionist parties, hence Lab won at Round 6.
Although good to see the Labour Party being not left wing enough for some, who've moved to the Socialist Labour Party.
IMF (as of July) think the £ is still overvalued by 5-20% ,which is a pretty large window.
That's not strictly an answer, but I'll take it, thank you. I think the best option for currency transfer would be something like Tramonex, which takes a cut of about 1.5% (so if you convert GBP to USD and straight back to GBP, you'd lose about 3%). But if GBP declines a further 5-20%, it's going to be worth it.
This is not going to be a happy few years for fiscal conservatives...
Xendpay are cheaper and pretty good. So are Azino though amateurish.
"They bet on the wrong horse"? Well, it'll do, but for the full 80's action movie, you have to stand back, fire the gun, then say something like "It's been revoked", or "Consider dat uh divorce!".... "
Since this is politicalbetting.com, what we should be exploring is not the morals but the lessons for betting purposes of the referendum result. Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly. What lessons are there to be learnt from this misreading, so we can bet more profitably in the future?
TBH I'm not sure. The weight of economic arguments for Remain was absolutely overwhelming. Did the public knowingly decide to accept the risks, or did they not believe them? Did we under-estimate economic confidence (voters thought they were safe to take the risk), or over-estimate it (voters thought they had nothing to lose)? Or was it different amongst different groups? Or did they knowingly prioritise sovereignty and/or immigration over economics?
I'm not sure there are useful answers to any of those questions. I cannot for a moment believe that the electorate had any expertise on the alternative scenarios open to the UK in the event of Brexit, anymore than I believe they understood the overall direction of travel of the EU as a whole had we voted Remain.
Given that most of us here are partisan one way or another, it's hard to be dispassionate. I've said before, I thought both campaigns were terrible - mendacity was the order of the day.
We're wise to be skeptical of post-ref surveys - for all we know the population voted to deport all the Romanians and then claimed concerns for sovereignty after the event.
If we're prepared to take recent surveys at face value, it appears that control (with immigration in second place) was the highest concern.
The TUC survey showed that those polled expected Leave to hit their finances, so I don't think it was ignorance. My personal sense (just from talking with friends and family) was that the economic claims were so overblown they lost credibility.
We can't blame people for not being receptive to the economic arguments. They were couched in language that was inaccessible to laypeople.
I think the main lesson (again) was we need more accurate opinion polling. Leave won at a canter, and in hindsight it's pretty clear that our assumptions about the British public's attitudes to the EU had been wrong (by several percentage points) for many years. (This should've been obvious really, given that one rarely if ever heard anything positive about the EU from individuals, newspapers or politicians over 40 years.) In hindsight it's also possible to see that the campaign itself (strong Leave team, Remain team led by PM) confirmed Leavers in their opinions and did almost nothing to challenge them.
Unionist votes swing directly to Con. Lib Dems on the ropes.
No tactical Unionist voting, are Labour even trying to get Tory votes?
Obviously there was tactical Unionist voting otherwise Labour wouldn't have won the seat in the end, would they?
Agreed, but interesting that SNP couldn't get party faithful out to back Nicola Sturgeon's Dad in greater numbers in her home town. Sturgeon also turned out to campaign for her Dad too.
"They bet on the wrong horse"? Well, it'll do, but for the full 80's action movie, you have to stand back, fire the gun, then say something like "It's been revoked", or "Consider dat uh divorce!".... "
Comments
Punishment budget.
Fiji are a far better team. GB not even close to scoring.
If the multiple financial and economic crisis of the past teaches us, is that those in place of authority tend to bend reality towards their personal benefits.
To put it simply, for too many times those people cried wolf in order to retain their jobs, so now no one believes them.
"Pundits, journalists, politicians,financial markets, and political punters - including yours truly - read it wrongly."
How many times in the last 30 years have those groups read it wrongly, or abused their position of trust to peddle their personal beliefs ?
Think about it.
Goodhart's law works just as good with people as with indexes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart's_law
"All metrics of scientific evaluation are bound to be abused. Goodhart’s law (named after the British economist who may have been the first to announce it) states that when a feature of the economy is picked as an indicator of the economy, then it inexorably ceases to function as that indicator because people start to game it."
LAB gain Irvine West.
I think Turkey joining is a good idea like Cameron did. But then I never pretended when that became uncomfortable that it was not an issue.
There were indeed a myriad of reasons why people voted Leave - as there were for why people voted Remain - here's one:
For sixty years after 1945 everyone got richer.
And then they stopped getting richer but the 1% still kept getting richer EVEN WHEN THEY WERE INCOMPETENT.
Now think back to before the vote - how many predictions of stock market collapses were there after a Leave vote ?
BUT DID ANYONE PREDICT THE STOCK MARKET WOULD RISE AFTER A LEAVE VOTE ???
Why should anyone believe the predictions of self-serving experts ?
That is a surprise.
(with apologies to Private Eye)
* Non-xenophobic Michael Gove points at Turkey, Albania, Serbia, Macedonia and Montenegro and screams 88 MILLION MIGRANTS!!!!
* Non-xenophobic Michael Gove screams MIGRANTS WILL KILL THE NHS AND SCHOOLS!!!
* Non-xenophobic Michael Gove screams 5 MILLION MIGRANTS! THAT'S AS BIG AS SCOTLAND!!!!
* Non-xenophobic Vote Leave campaign screams LOOK! TURKEY IS JOINING THE EU! AAARGH!
* Non-xenophobic Vote Leave campaign screams MIGRANTS! MIGRANTS! MIGRANTS!
For example, UKIP won the 2014 EU elections. This is a weather vane of sorts.
Farage was right when he said Brexit was a victory for decent people. The referendum has exposed the Europhiles utter contempt for democracy.
@britainelects
Renfrew South & Gallowhill (Renfrewshire) first preferences:
SNP: 47.8% (+6.9)
LAB: 36.9% (-8.5)
CON: 13.4% (+9.1)
LDEM: 1.9% (+0.1)
It is worth remembering that we are still in the phoney war. It is only when we hear what the Brexit deal really means that we shall see the reaction of stock and currency markets.
There is a lot of shorting the pound going on.
Britain Elects @britainelects 13m13 minutes ago
SNP GAIN Renfrew South & Gallowhill (Renfrewshire) from Labour.
Britain Elects @britainelects 8m8 minutes ago
Renfrew South & Gallowhill (Renfrewshire) first preferences:
SNP: 47.8% (+6.9)
LAB: 36.9% (-8.5)
CON: 13.4% (+9.1)
LDEM: 1.9% (+0.1)
In 2014 the majority of Britons voted for parties of Remain.
Certainly after the ERM disaster in 1992, which proved that european integration was harmful for the economy.
Given that most of us here are partisan one way or another, it's hard to be dispassionate. I've said before, I thought both campaigns were terrible - mendacity was the order of the day.
We're wise to be skeptical of post-ref surveys - for all we know the population voted to deport all the Romanians and then claimed concerns for sovereignty after the event.
If we're prepared to take recent surveys at face value, it appears that control (with immigration in second place) was the highest concern.
The TUC survey showed that those polled expected Leave to hit their finances, so I don't think it was ignorance. My personal sense (just from talking with friends and family) was that the economic claims were so overblown they lost credibility.
We can't blame people for not being receptive to the economic arguments. They were couched in language that was inaccessible to laypeople.
OK, one obvious one is that the mean absolute error for referenda in the UK is a f**k of a lot bigger than that for general elections - enormously so, in fact.. The MAE for Euro16 ranged from about 2 to about 12: the acceptable limit for UKGEs is about 2-2.5 (1992 and 2015 GEs had MAEs of about 2.25-2.75).. This is not surprising: the AV referendum and ScotIndy also had some polls with >10 MAEs, but because the winning margins for both were over 10%, nobody noticed.
From a betting POV, I think this means the polls for GE2020 will be more accurate than punters believe, and betting behavior will be even more skewed than usual, leading to potentially greater profit for us in PB.com.
I like to think that Euro16 finally killed the canard that betting odds are a good predictor, but I fear that some dumb f**k will say "but of course they're more accurate, because it's their own money" and for the good of the country I will have to have them killed. It's for the best.
The conjecture was a 6% fall in GDP between the scenarios. But how did we get the £4300 figure when a 6% fall in family income between the figures would be considerably less?
Family income is a fraction of total GDP. Dividing GDP by number of families was about unheard.of fabrication.
Personally, I didn't expect a majority of British voters to understand ever-closer Union & I expected them to consider Remain to be the apparent status quo option.
So, I think the results of the referendum were actually in line with other referendum results (like the Scottish Independence vote or the New Zealand flag referendum) where people tend to be more likely to choose the conservative & status quo option.
There are two issues with this. Firstly, forgone wealth doesn't have the same impact as lost wealth. I hope that's obvious. Secondly, it's hard to sell a reduction in trend growth by 0.4% (Treasury) to 0.1% (FTA) as a huge deal to ordinary folk.
The reason for that is, I hope, also obvious. The differences in regional wealth are so large, that 6% over 14 years is literally noise. London has 240% higher GDP/capita than Wales.
The fact that WTO would devastate certain sectors of the UK economy is much more powerful, but was never deployed.
With the extra £350 million per week for the NHS and a secure job for myself, life is pretty good for foxy!
"There is a place for class prejudice if it is done properly. Resent privileged Conservatives, for instance, but resent them for the right reason. They are not hostile to poor people. Their sin is more often casualness, a vision of politics as a parlour game to be played with old college friends. If it goes wrong, well, you win some, you lose some. There is no malice here, just the frivolity of people unmarked by life.
David Cameron spent his last parliamentary session as prime minister holding up cat photos and chuckling like a man who had just lost a rugby-club drinking contest, not a referendum on Europe. He then decorated with official honours various losers from the Remain campaign and so many of his own advisers as to make you wonder what, short of inadvertently sitting on the nuclear button, a staffer had to do to not make the cut. "
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/14/osborne-predicts-30bn-hole-in-public-finance-if-uk-votes-to-leave-eu
Irvine West:
SNP: 37.5% (+0.7)
LAB: 33.1% (-7.1)
CON: 20.6% (+8.6)
SLP: 4.2% (+2.6)
GRN: 3.0% (+3.0)
LD: 1.5% (-3.2)
Lab elected stage 6.
https://twitter.com/brianmoore666/status/763861442151972864
https://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/763862266693427204
https://twitter.com/brianmoore666/status/763866471101501440
https://twitter.com/piersmorgan/status/763870250928640000
The 'Working-class-voters-not-doing-what-the-Labour-Party-want' meme is causing a lot of angst in the media, who, with some notable exceptions, still don't really grasp it as anything but a passing fad. Having spent the last 20 years poring scorn on the white working class, many middle class lefties are rather surprised to find that the WWC doesnt much care for them either. They may continue to vote Labour, as a least unpalatable option, but that shouldn't be confused for having anything at all in common with their views and values.
But you knew that.
I have diversified wider. Some in Dollar earning assets, some in Euro and CHF earning assets and some earning in China and the Far East (ex Japan). Big Pharma and consumer goods with solid brands mostly.
China is not looking so dismal as last year, but does have a way to go. It is also particularly exposed to a trade war with the USA.
Cameron...not so much
This is not news!
Britain Elects @britainelects 38m38 minutes ago
Labour GAIN Irvine West (North Ayrshire) from SNP.
Britain Elects @britainelects 9m9 minutes ago
Irvine West:
SNP: 37.5% (+0.7)
LAB: 33.1% (-7.1)
CON: 20.6% (+8.6)
SLP: 4.2% (+2.6)
GRN: 3.0% (+3.0)
LD: 1.5% (-3.2)
Lab elected stage 6.
But you realise that there are untold numbers of City 'experts' who get paid a fortune and who predicted the opposite.
I suspect that the people who voted Lab in the Euro's were not Leavers, as those would mostly already have switched to the kippers.
A second question: given that previous nominations have been made by excluding members the High Court has now said can participate in the election, are all those previous nominations invalid?
And a third: What on earth happens if on Friday the Appeal Court takes us back to square one? Other than CLP Secretaries jumping out of the window at the sheer administrative chaos of it all.
When the exit polls came out I thought that I might have over done it, but my caution was vindicated.
This is not going to be a happy few years for fiscal conservatives...
Gemma Doyle@gemmacdoyle
Lot of Scottish CLPs nominating @owensmith2016 this evening #LabourLeadership
Britain Elects @britainelects 24s24 seconds ago
Conservative HOLD Ombersley (Worcestershire).
Although good to see the Labour Party being not left wing enough for some, who've moved to the Socialist Labour Party.
#shocked
I've seen splits on class and age grounds but has anyone seen any splits on private sector employment / public sector employment ?
Britain Elects @britainelects 4m4 minutes ago
Ombersley (Worcestershire) result:
CON: 63.2% (+15.3)
LDEM: 14.8% (+9.7)
UKIP: 14.0% (-19.2)
IND: 7.9% (+7.9)
Lab and Grn didn't stand.
"
Monarchist / republican?