Jump to content

Brexit Spinoff: Pound Slump and Economy


Supermalt

Recommended Posts

Democracy isn't necessarily about having a vote and that vote being final. Democracy is about having the government represent the people and those people having a say in how they want their country run.

"the people have spoken" isn't necessarily true

28% of the electorate didn't speak, people voted without knowing what would happen, people were mislead then voted and those who campaigned for their vote withdrew all of their promises immediately after they won

37% OUT - 35% IN - 28% NO VOTE

Research says 7% of people regret their vote (suggesting 1.2 million) http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-news-second-eu-referendum-leave-voters-regret-bregret-choice-in-millions-a7113336.html (OUT ends up being 35% if you negate the 7% of voters who supposedly regret their vote)

People voted out of the EU because they were under the impression that they would have less immigration and more resources for the country, they didn't listen to warnings of economic turmoil because the people campaigning to leave didn't want to be real with them.

 

If a democracy is about the government representing the people and the people having their say - is it not more democratic to have a vote now, when people are more educated about what it means, and that these false promises have been dropped?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@dub

how many people regret voting for an electoral party after they break promises, were misinformed, get fucked over etc.

heres a bunch of stuff the tories said they wouldn't do then went back on it.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-reveals-21-broken-promises-6537411

Why wasn't there a recall for a general election, surely the people who voted for them are in the some sort of way comparable to the brexit regretters. if we have another referendum and stay in Europe then that's fine imo. But please don't insult peoples intelligence by calling in democratic.

/

 

not sure what Banes will of the people public referendum on the iraq war was, can someone link me?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

USA said it will not trade with the uk outside of the EU until they come to a new trade agreement in which they are last in the queue.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how is a second referendum undemocratic?

to vote the decision down in parliament would be undemocratic, but why would allowing the public, now that they are more educated on the matter, to change their minds be undemocratic?

general elections happen every 5 years (or previously, less if called for), people have a chance to change their minds whether they want us to continue down the path of having a certain party in power, leaving the EU has clearly been communicated as something we can't reverse once we actually go through with it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either way we are going out the EU:

- New Tory leader acitvates article 50

- Second referendum happens and remain wins, leading to a ukip running away with the election after next

- New Tory leader doesnt pull out the EU and renegotiates, immigration doesnt fall and ukip runs away with the election after next

The train left the station many years ago and now its picked up full steam, theres no stopping it now, heading for destination race war.

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you think that if we somehow end up staying in the EU that politicians who would vote 'out' of the EU in parliament would be in the majority?

I mean no doubt UKIP is going to pick up more voters regardless of what happens, but I can't see them getting near to a majority, perhaps a Conservative coalition

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dub said:

how is a second referendum undemocratic?

to vote the decision down in parliament would be undemocratic, but why would allowing the public, now that they are more educated on the matter, to change their minds be undemocratic?

general elections happen every 5 years (or previously, less if called for), people have a chance to change their minds whether they want us to continue down the path of having a certain party in power, leaving the EU has clearly been communicated as something we can't reverse once we actually go through with it

 

Because like you said the decision to leave is/was irreversible. This was a known stipulation before the referendum happened. Why hold some faux referendum to  appeal it almost immediately if the result isn't the one you want. If there was even a slight possibility we could leave Europe then David should not have held it. That kind of illusion of choice is a ridiculous spit in the face of democracy. (in before ice tells us it's always been this way anyway)

The whole thing was a farce, there were two possible outcomes, with no real plan on how to proceed if one of those outcomes came to pass. Tells you all you needed to know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we can argue about the issues and realities around the topic all we want - I mean I can accept it if came down to "its just not going to happen" as an answer to the idea but I still don't see how it would be "undemocratic" to hold a second referendum, which is what most people's argument against the idea is

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course create absolute mayhem crash the dollar the pound take away from the people making the pound worthless....higher the food prices utility bills etc 

 

there planning to scrap actual pysical money from uk anyway so this just preparing us for sonething worse 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

thought the big bad EU was leading us there?

UKIP should be running against all these broken promises, their time now, no? Why they so quiet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The UK economy is contracting at its fastest rate since the financial crisis, making an interest rate cut "a foregone conclusion", according to financial data company Markit.

The Markit/CIPS purchasing managers' index that showed activity in the UK's dominant services sector saw its sharpest fall in seven years.

It follows falls in both construction and manufacturing in July.

The index fell from 52.3 in June to 47.4 in July, indicating contraction.

The figure confirmed an earlier flash estimate of service sector output.

Taken together with the manufacturing and construction data, Markit said a cut in interest rates by the Bank of England - expected following Thursday's meeting of the Monetary Policy Committee - was a foregone conclusion.

Policymakers are widely expected to reduce rates from the current 0.5% to a new low of 0.25%.

Markit said incoming new business volumes fell for the first time since the end of 2012.

The pace of contraction was comparatively sharper than that seen for total business activity, and the fastest since March 2009, it added.

Moreover, companies widely reported the outcome of the EU referendum had weighed on new business inflows during the month.

Chris Williamson, Markit's chief economist, said the service sector data taken together with the construction and manufacturing data pointed to the UK economy shrinking by 0.4% in three months to September, a fall not seen since early 2009, when the Bank last cut interest rates.

"The unprecedented month-on-month drop in the all-sector index has undoubtedly increased the chances of the UK sliding into at least a mild recession," he said.

Markit said it was too early to know if the PMIs would stay as weak as they are now, but it said confidence about the year ahead was at its lowest since February 2009 among firms in the services sector, which accounts for nearly 80% of UK economic output.

"A quarter-point cut in interest rates therefore seems to be a foregone conclusion, " Mr Williamson added, "though the extent and nature of other non-standard stimulus measures remains a far greater source of uncertainty."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

Maintaining the UK's membership of the EU's single market could add an extra 4% to its economy, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS).

The think tank weighed up the benefits of staying in the single market compared with membership of the World Trade Organization alone.

The UK voted to leave the EU in the June referendum.

Paul Johnson, IFS director, said there was a big difference between access and membership of the single market.

"We've heard a lot of people saying of course we'll have access if we leave the single market union.

"Broadly speaking, yes, we will, as every other country in the world does. You can export into the EU wherever you are from, but there are different sorts of barriers to doing so."

'Meaningless concept'

The IFS report said access to the single market was "virtually meaningless as a concept" because "any country in the World Trade Organization - from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe - had 'access' to the EU as an export destination".

Five models for post-Brexit UK trade

Who has access to the single market?

The IFS report argued that the special advantage of being an EU member was that its single market reduced or eliminated barriers to trading in services, such as the need for licences or other regulations.

The IFS said that the absence of trade barriers for services was far more important than removing tariffs on the trade in goods between EU members, such as customs checks and import taxes.

It said that while leaving the EU would free the UK from having to make a budgetary contribution of £8bn, loss of trade could depress tax receipts by a larger amount.

It found new trade deals would be unlikely to make up for lost EU trade, which accounts for 44% of British exports and 39% of service exports.

The government has yet to start negotiating the UK's departure.

The IFS issued stark warnings over the impact of Brexit ahead of the EU referendum, which have made some question its views.

Mr Johnson said he hoped the IFS was proved wrong.

"We wait to see what the economic consequences are going to be, but we've already seen the Bank of England significantly reduce its predictions of growth over the next couple of years and increase its view of where unemployment will be," he added.

'Particularly vulnerable'

The report said UK services would be particularly vulnerable if the government were unable or unwilling to negotiate a replacement deal and become a member of the European Economic Area (EEA), like Norway.

The IFS report added that financial services, which generate 8% of the UK's economic output, might suffer in particular if a final Brexit deal meant they lost their so-called "passporting rights" that allows them to be sold directly to EU customers and businesses.

Canary WharfImage copyrightGETTY IMAGES

"To maintain these rights would likely require membership of the European Economic Area (EEA)," it said.

"But that would come at the potentially considerable cost of submitting to future regulations designed in the EU without input from the UK. The UK may have to make some very difficult choices between the benefits from passporting and the costs of submitting to external imposed regulation."

The IFS explored the possibility of the UK signing its own free trade agreement with the EU, or simply adopting WTO rules.

But in both cases, the report argued, such deals would still involve tariffs or other barriers to free trade in goods and services.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

dont have a clue ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

86p to 1€

FFS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...