UK Leaves the EU - What happens next?

Brassneck · Jun 30, 2016

grandwizard said:
urrmm Fantastic speech but nothing has changed. Politically Yes, legally NO, Reality NO,"feeling good is great" but by the looks of things nothing will be implemented. Leavers should hold their breathe for a while before claiming any sign of freedom.

Absolutely agree. Government made no plans for a leave vote and before the vote the civil service advice was that it would take at least 10 years for us to extricate our way out of the EU.

Nothing is going to happen quickly if at all.

Edwin · Jun 30, 2016

Michael Gove just stabbed Boris Johnson in the front by going directly up against him for Conservative Party leader!

But I have come, reluctantly, to the conclusion that Boris cannot provide the leadership or build the team for the task ahead.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...b03de63694b28a#block-5774d22de4b03de63694b28a

Cat, meet pigeons...

Adam H · Jun 30, 2016

Live blog this morning for those interested : http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/liveblogs/2016-06-30-2/

Edwin · Jun 30, 2016

Andrea Leadsom just declared too. I think you can see what's happening here: the Brexiteers do NOT want to win this, so are engineering to split their helping of the vote as much as possible...

bonusmedia · Jun 30, 2016

BREWSTERS said:
I knew I shouldn't have checked my phone....

Cake analogy - if you bake another, I don't get less as a result - agreed - but the creation of another cake devalued the first slightly (but increases the value of flour and eggs because there are less of them, and you are down by the cost of the ingredients.

Painting analogy - wealth hasn't been created, the value of the component parts has fluctuated IF, someone else pays you more for it. It's similar to a profit 'on paper'.

The cat site analogy - throughout the whole scenario as described, no wealth has been created. Money has moved around. People have paid money to see pictures of cats...not a commodity. And the £50m we've got is just a balance on a screen until we spend it. Buy a Ferrari each and we're just transferring money for a (usually) depreciating asset. None of which is affecting the global money supply or debt, or global wealth.

Couple of analogies for you.
You buy a house for £100k in cash - in 10 years it's worth £150k. Have you created wealth? No, because the replacement cost is the same.
If you bought it with a mortgage, you've paid £70k out and still owe £50k, meanwhile the replacement cost is still £150k - you're £20k down at this point. The bank is £20k up at this point, they've had £70k and still owns half your house ( but holds full title).

Next, you're in China, and all you have is a £50 note. Nowhere accepts Sterling - you effectively have nothing.

Cash doesnt necessarily equate to wealth.

There is a finite amount of wealth on the planet, the value of which fluctuates, but mostly increases, which decreases the value of the money that buys it. But all the while, the money in circulation is never enough to pay off what is owed.

OK... what we certainly can agree on is that we have very different definitions of 'wealth', and yours is an unusual one.
If, according to your definition, there is a finite amount of wealth that cannot be created or destroyed then wealth is a zero sum game.

I'm not sure your definition is particularly useful, because taken to logical extremes it says that someone with £50M in cash has no wealth and that we have the same wealth now as we had when living in caves 10,000 years ago. I think that defies common sense - i.e. most people would say it's not a useful definition. In fact I wonder if you're really just re-defining matter/energy as wealth.

BTW if you're in China with a £50 note, you certainly don't have nothing. You can change your £50 for local currency relatively easily. Money is useful precisely because it is a (practically) universally accepted store of value.

VSC · Jun 30, 2016

BREWSTERS said:
The helium has always been there, so the new find hasn't created it. And it doesn't add to the money supply. Whoever owns that gas field will be able to trade the gas for money. The new find will decrease the value of any other stock of helium, perhaps only by a tiny amount but it will, because the new find doesn't proportionally increase the demand for it.

Yes, it has always been there, but it has not be accounted for in the finite resources list.
But in this case, demand is increasing for helium so my point is that with increased demand the pricing may still go up.

Demand is not always defined by the product itself, but in the uses for that product which can increase quite separately from the actual product itself ...

Silicon for example was in demand to make semi-conductors, then computers and the solar industry saw demand for it increase yet pricing has just risen each time there was more demand. Though the pricing is down to the need for manufacturers rather than the raw ingredient itself ...

What you are saying (if I understand you correctly), is that nothing new that is discovered/created can only create demand by equally reducing the demand of something else, so they balance each other out?

VSC · Jun 30, 2016

Edwin said:
Andrea Leadsom just declared too. I think you can see what's happening here: the Brexiteers do NOT want to win this, so are engineering to split their helping of the vote as much as possible...

conspiracy theory thread?

VSC · Jun 30, 2016

Very interesting programme on Radio 4 on the history, development, philosophy of sovereignty ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07hhvxx

Edwin · Jun 30, 2016

Referendum may come under legal challenge (not the result but the whole basis of it being held in the first place) And yes, the courts can - and do - trump the government, though of course it remains to be seen whether they would in this case!
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/30/politics-brexit-unlawful-eu-uk

Edwin · Jun 30, 2016

Related aside: anyone else having trouble sleeping? I haven't had a proper night since Wednesday last week**

(**Which may explain, though not justify, my peevish tone sometimes)

bonusmedia · Jun 30, 2016

Edwin said:
Related aside: anyone else having trouble sleeping? I haven't had a proper night since Wednesday last week**

(**Which may explain, though not justify, my peevish tone sometimes)

Yes. I have a huge amount of work to do and keep getting sidetracked by internet arguments. I gave up arguing on the internet as a pointless and frustrating waste of time years ago. I also normally stick to the sensible rule of keeping religion and politics out of business. I put both aside last week because the referendum was 'too important' and I regret that decision but haven't quite been able to stop...

bonusmedia · Jun 30, 2016

Edwin said:
Michael Gove just stabbed Boris Johnson in the front by going directly up against him for Conservative Party leader!

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...b03de63694b28a#block-5774d22de4b03de63694b28a

Cat, meet pigeons...

He's said himself many times that he's not right for the job, is this a serious bid?

We can't seriously have a prime minister who's scared of flying - although at this rate he won't actually be welcome anywhere else

bonusmedia · Jun 30, 2016

https://next.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Gove wants to properly leave the single market - so at least there is some intellectual honesty about controlling immigration there, although the cost would probably destroy us for a generation

Then again he does admit he's not good with numbers. Another winning quality...

websaway · Jun 30, 2016

You are being driven in a car that is careering over a cliff.
You jump out and find you have to walk all the way home.
You notice that up ahead the car has stopped short of the cliff edge.
It might be worth asking the driver where they are heading for next.

bonusmedia · Jun 30, 2016

websaway said:
You are being driven in a car that is careering over a cliff.
You jump out and find you have to walk all the way home.
You notice that up ahead the car has stopped short of the cliff edge.
It might be worth asking the driver where they are heading for next.

To ask the driver where they are heading, turn to page 34.
To abseil down the cliff, turn to page 56.
To slay the dragon and rescue the princess, turn to page 21

websaway · Jun 30, 2016

Anyway, it does seem that, as fast as people conjure up reasons to render democracy redundant and the desire to instil fear and regret into the leave camp, facts arise that dismiss them as just wishful thinking.
This issue will now pan out over the coming weeks, months and years, and to repeat what might be an apt quote from a past thread.
" You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube"

websaway · Jun 30, 2016

"Brexit means Brexit, the campaign was fought, the vote was held, turnout was high, and the public gave their verdict. There must be no attempt to remain inside the EU, no attempt to re-join it through the back door and no second referendum."
Theresa May 30 June 2016

I wonder which bit of this that moron Tim Farron does not understand.
Hope he's not a member on here, or I'll be in trouble again.

bonusmedia · Jun 30, 2016

I imagine Tim Farron understands Theresa May's position perfectly well - he just has a different one.

I believe he was arguing that a decision made on the basis of lies should not be binding. He is offering voters a democratic choice - if you agree with him, vote for the Lib Dems at the next election - if not, don't. Given your enthusiasm for protecting democracy I'm not sure why you have such a problem with that.

As it happens I agree that we've made our bed and now we must lie in it.

However if we leave Europe on significantly different terms than those promised by the leave campaign, then the will of the people has not been carried out, has it?

If you vote for jam tomorrow and then I decide to give you marmite instead, you might reasonably question my mandate

VSC · Jun 30, 2016

I almost wish that this thread could be closed and then reopened on the 1st January 2019.
Because till then, neither side will truly know the real results ...

The markets (if that is your reference point) will settle now till Article 50 is invoked - then they will do their thing again. Then they will find their own level till the UK actually leaves and the World knows the terms - flutter again. Then we wait to see what trade deals the UK gets - flutter again ...

It is pretty pointless for either side to be saying "told you so" right now.

websaway said:
Anyway, it does seem that, as fast as people conjure up reasons to render democracy redundant and the desire to instil fear and regret into the leave camp, facts arise that dismiss them as just wishful thinking.

People are not conjuring up anything, or wishing to instil fear ... they are sharing points of view from one side of the debate, which yes was not a majority, but was by no means a minority and which have a right of expression. What frustrates you about some people expressing their concerns, is the same frustration expressed by people who believe that the wrong decision was made. What I think is an irritation is people on both sides just dismissing peoples point of view out of hand and not showing respect to the right of everyone to have their own viewpoint.

and