UK Leaves the EU - What happens next?

[bonusmedia]

Thing is, it's not just the Blairites resigning. There are MPs to the left of the party in the mix. Even Pat Glass who was only put in post 2 days ago has resigned. The complaints are much the same: performance, leadership skills, ability to reach out to the county. It's a fundamental misreading to put this all down to Blairites.

Exactly, it's not about policy, it's about ability. Corbyn's a good honest bloke with integrity who refuses to compromise. These are admirable traits but just about the opposite of the skills needed for success in our political system

 

[VSC]

I cannot understand why the MPs/PLP are so out of touch with their supporters/members, both on the referendum & Corbyn.

I am a labour supporter who wants Corbyn to go. I know many other labour supporters who feel the same.
At the end of the day we need an effective labour party that has a chance of government. I do not believe that Corbyn has proven himself to be an effective leader, nor does the rump of the PLP.

You see the MPs/PLP as being out of touch because the situation does not agree with your POV.
I see them as being in touch because it does agree with my POV.

We will have to agree to disagree, and wait to see what happens

 

[VSC]

No. But arranging for nominations to be "lent" to a candidate, who would not normally receive those nominations, in order to meet the minimum nomination threshold & gain them a place on the ballot, is.

... and in that same article it says that the PLP wanted a wide representation of nominations which is why some MPs did that.

Anyway I thought that you completely distrusted BBC reporting?

 

[armistice]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36660133

FTSE 100 closes above pre-Brexit level
'Analysts said the sharp recovery in the FTSE 100 was unexpected.'

 

[Toonz]

Emily Thorberry was speaking earlier about that fractious Monday night PLP meeting. She said what was noticeable was that all the criticism aimed at Corbyn was about personality (as she called it, but which we can probably assume to mean the kind of things I mentioned above) and none of it was about policy. Thornberry is one of the most loyal Corbynite MPs and even she didn't put this down to an ideological battle with Blairites.

 

[bonusmedia]

Interesting insight into Gove's version of House of Cards: http://news.sky.com/story/1719331/goves-wife-raises-johnson-leadership-concerns

Makes specific reference to support from Mudoch and Dacre in case anyone had forgotten how influential their rags are... she has worked for both

 

[BREWSTERS]

I think it's fair to say that in the 70 odd years since Henry Ford may have said that we went from being a nation where the vast majority were poor tenants to a property-owning majority - and saw the greatest rise in living standards there has ever been. Our flawed banking system facilitated that.

As I say I'm no expert and I'm happy to learn more if you have credible sources

For example;
Imagine a country of 10 people; each borrow £100, and because of interest, they each owe £105. There is £1000 in circulation but collectively they owe the bank £1050. There is never enough money in circulation to pay the bank, therefore the population is forever in debt and under control of the lender.
This is the system we have now, as individuals and collectively as a nation.
When people default on their debts, the lender takes their property (which is the real wealth - money isn't wealth) and ultimately the lender ends up owning all the money, and the assets.

Going back a few hundred years it was illegal to charge interest on money. Under Islamic law it still is.

The UK government pay £1billion per week in interest. We are borrowing money to pay interest. It's easy to see where this is heading...especially with easy credit available.

None of this is theory.

 

[VSC]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36660133

FTSE 100 closes above pre-Brexit level
'Analysts said the sharp recovery in the FTSE 100 was unexpected.'

Good news, but remember:
The FTSE 250 - which contains more UK-focused companies - closed 3.2% higher on Wednesday, but still remains more than 7% below its pre-Brexit level.

Also, European stocks have gone up, so looks like most of Europe recovering.

I think the general opinion though is that till Article 50 is triggered, we won't get any real idea of whether there will be a long term fallout:

"Whilst that doesn't remove the uncertainty with respect to the eventual outcome, it also means that markets are going to have plenty of time to settle into their new-found reality and equilibrium," he said.

But Adam Jepsen, founder of Financial Spreads, urged caution: "Any investors who think the markets have calmed down should think again. It is far more likely that we are in the eye of the storm."

 

[VSC]

For example;
Imagine a country of 10 people; each borrow £100, and because of interest, they each owe £105. There is £1000 in circulation but collectively they owe the bank £1050. There is never enough money in circulation to pay the bank, therefore the population is forever in debt and under control of the lender.
This is the system we have now, as individuals and collectively as a nation.
When people default on their debts, the lender takes their property (which is the real wealth - money isn't wealth) and ultimately the lender ends up owning all the money, and the assets.

Going back a few hundred years it was illegal to charge interest on money. Under Islamic law it still is.

The UK government pay £1billion per week in interest. We are borrowing money to pay interest. It's easy to see where this is heading...especially with easy credit available.

None of this is theory.

https://www.quora.com/Why-does-every-country-in-the-world-have-debts
More of interest than the article are the in depth comments debating different POVs

 

[armistice]

Good news, but remember:
The FTSE 250 - which contains more UK-focused companies - closed 3.2% higher on Wednesday, but still remains more than 7% below its pre-Brexit level.

Also, European stocks have gone up, so looks like most of Europe recovering.

I think the general opinion though is that till Article 50 is triggered, we won't get any real idea of whether there will be a long term fallout:

"Whilst that doesn't remove the uncertainty with respect to the eventual outcome, it also means that markets are going to have plenty of time to settle into their new-found reality and equilibrium," he said.

But Adam Jepsen, founder of Financial Spreads, urged caution: "Any investors who think the markets have calmed down should think again. It is far more likely that we are in the eye of the storm."

Well aware thanks, exchange rates are more concerning than stock markets paper value of shares.
The USD/GBP rate is up today also (above 1.35 this afternoon, but 1% up now) right direction but a long way to go.

 

[bonusmedia]

For example;
Imagine a country of 10 people; each borrow £100, and because of interest, they each owe £105. There is £1000 in circulation but collectively they owe the bank £1050. There is never enough money in circulation to pay the bank, therefore the population is forever in debt and under control of the lender.
This is the system we have now, as individuals and collectively as a nation.
When people default on their debts, the lender takes their property (which is the real wealth - money isn't wealth) and ultimately the lender ends up owning all the money, and the assets.

Going back a few hundred years it was illegal to charge interest on money. Under Islamic law it still is.

The UK government pay £1billion per week in interest. We are borrowing money to pay interest. It's easy to see where this is heading...especially with easy credit available.

None of this is theory.

This is why I asked for credible sources - that is not the system we have now.
We do not have a zero-sum system. Wealth is both created and destroyed.

Arguing against interest is arguing against credit, since without interest there is no incentive to lend.

Credit enables people to own their own houses. It enables people to buy a car to get to work. It enables people to start businesses from nothing.

Predatory lending is bad - but credit is not intrinsically bad - far from it - it is essential and massively beneficial to our economy

 

[Edwin]

From the Guardian live blog:

The journalist Paul Mason says the EU leaders beefed up the draft of the communique they issued at the end of their “EU27” meeting today (the one Britain was not invited to) to make it clear they they will fight any attempt by David Cameron’s successor to try to get access to the single market while not allowing free movement.

Of course, it's all negotiation and posturing, but there seems to be remarkable unanimity on this point at this early stage from the rump EU. Perhaps the earlier talk about EEA- with France/Germany fishing to take the City's financial sector business away was accurate.

 

[gimpydog]

At some point you have to stop mocking people you disagree with and actually make deals with them

NEVER

You're the one who wanted pedantic adherence to the strict meaning of words

Think long & hard.

 

[gimpydog]

The complaints are much the same: performance, leadership skills, ability to reach out to the county.

Laying all the blame at Corbyn's door is a bit harsh, don't you think?

Hilary Benn was the referendum strategist.

Alan Johnson lead the campaign. A majority in his own constituency voted 'leave'. So much for 'reaching out'.

Would you support either of them?

 

[gimpydog]

Anyway I thought that you completely distrusted BBC reporting?

Not completely. There are a very few exceptions.

But those I quoted spoke in person on Newsnight. I heard it live, straight from the horses mouth.

 

[Toonz]

Laying all the blame at Corbyn's door is a bit harsh, don't you think?

Hilary Benn was the referendum strategist.

Alan Johnson lead the campaign. A majority in his own constituency voted 'leave'. So much for 'reaching out'.

I'm not laying all the blame at Corbyn's door. I was speaking about the reasons of Corbyn's frontbenchers for stepping down.

As it happens, I don't blame Corbyn as much as some for the referendum result. I actually think his '7 out of 10' position was fairly astute. If he had given a full-throttled celebration of the EU, it would have (a) sounded insincere, and (b) probably backfired (in a "they're all singing from the same hymnsheet" kind of way, like the IndyRef).

 

[BREWSTERS]

This is why I asked for credible sources - that is not the system we have now.

Yes it is.

The value of assets fluctuates, but the amount of money in circulation is always less than what is owed.

Money starts with debt.

It's not up for debate.

 

[VSC]

Not completely. There are a very few exceptions.

But those I quoted spoke in person on Newsnight. I heard it live, straight from the horses mouth.

Progress!

 

[bonusmedia]

Yes it is.

The value of assets fluctuates, but the amount of money in circulation is always less than what is owed.

Money starts with debt.

It's not up for debate.

Your example fails to take into account the constant creation of new wealth and new money - it's quite possible for all of those 10 people to pay off their loans.

Yes, money is debt - a system of IOUs. Without it we'd be stuck with the barter system which is not terribly efficient.

Not sure why you are so anti-interest, have you always bought everything outright?

 

[BREWSTERS]

Your example fails to take into account the constant creation of new wealth and new money - it's quite possible for all of those 10 people to pay off their loans.

No, it's impossible.

For a start, new money only comes from new debt.
Whenever money is created the value of money in circulation is devalued, ie, inflation.
There is no new wealth, only fluctuation in value of current assets and movement of money.

Consider that wealth is linked to every square metre of land on the planet. And there is a finite number of metres, therefore only so much wealth. And there is a certain amount of money in circulation.
You could say ok, let's flatten some mountains and put the rocks into the sea and make more land. Great! But remember there's only a certain amount of money in circulation, therefore the value per square metre of land has gone down. The total remains the same.

The money supply is being added to at a fantastic rate, which comes from more debt...imagine what's going to happen when interest rates go up even say, 2%. There's going to be financial carnage. And it's unavoidable the way things are.

I know you won't believe it coming from me, but please independently verify it because it's important that people get it.