You offered the fact that they had goals and accomplished them in support of the notion that they aren't stupid. He said that having goals and accomplishing them doesn't exclude one from either being stupid or behaving stupidly. You agreed with him and then said that was irrelevant. Maybe they're stupid. Maybe they aren't. I don't care about that at all. It's the logic in your argument that I find lacking.
I care that they're stupid. I don't want a positive feedback loop of pervasive economic recession and it's easier to avoid that with not-stupid leaders
Now that's just rude. You're narrowing the discussion to a closed universe. That's where my claim of irrelevancy comes from. I'll reformulate my claim to appease you: this notion that the Brexiters "didn't know what they were doing" isn't truthful. You may disagree with their ends and believe them to be stupid, but I'm simply arguing that they are achieving ends that were premeditated, not serendipitously guessing.
Except Farage has already admitted that the leave voters that thought why would be funding the NHS or gaining control of their borders with their vote aren't going to get what they wanted. So, are they really achieving those ends?
So voting for the goals of a false campaign promise is now stupid? Every U.S. Electorate in the last 100 years, red and blue, is "stupid" under that metric. Keep in mind many "remain" voters were told that exiting would result in more European war, which is a comical degree of histrionics.
Depends on the promise. People that vote for Trump thinking he will actually build a wall and have Mexico pay for it are stupid. People that voted for Bernie thinking that he would actually be able to get a national $15/hr minimum wage were stupid. Farage made a bunch of Brexit voters feel pretty stupid the very next day.
I don't disagree with you. Smarter people certainly vet a campaign's promises. But the vast majority of Brexiters knew what exiting the EU would mean in terms of regulation, immigration, and overall integration into Europe. All of the effects? Of course not, most experts wouldn't predict everything. But they are getting what they want and the narrative that voting "exit" was akin to guessing is incorrect.
when you see a person routinely call other people idiots, what do you generally conclude about that person? Just curious. No right or wrong answer.
So the Conservative Party had about half of its MPs vote to leave, half vote to remain, were publicly attacking each other all over social media and television, have had their leader announce his resignation, etc. And yet, they are the more united party than their primary opposition. This is fantastic.
then you have UKIP who'd rather do business with Putin than Obama, and are endorsed by a USA presidential candidate that doesnt even want a trade deal with Canada. #ruins
The Labour Party throughout their history have shown themselves to be supremely factional. Corbyn will not go, his supporters are delusional & he passionately believes in the membership deciding the leader. Not sure I posted this on this thread before but if you watch this from about 15 mins on you can history almost repeating itself. Labour in the 80s after just losing to Thatcher tearing themselves apart. Tony Benn puts forward a motion that the members should decide the leader (ironically it's his son who has started this parliamentary coup against Corbyn). You can actually see a young Corbyn in it discussing how he and others passionately believed in this and not the parliamentary party selecting the leader. The Party ends up splitting over the Leftists taking over the party. It's an interesting 4 party political series anyway. It was made in 1994 so at the dawn of New Labour so it's very much a reflective piece with all of the modern leaders at the time with the attitude of "thank God we're not like that anymore, never going back ect". Corbyn ect are seen as the dinosaurs, but they've got control of the party right now. The issue with the "Members" pick the leader is that unlike primaries in the US, joining a political movement in Europe is required to vote on these things and the majority of the electorate are not bothered. You can say a party is for the members but when you are trying to elect someone what's the point of picking someone unelectable if you are a political party?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...pose-shielding-investors-in-italian-bank-plan Could get interesting with Italy real quick, Merkel and Germany want to hold Italy to EU banking regulations, hard to see the EU giving Italy a pass when stating UK will have to pay the consequences of their exit.
Ben Judah @b_judah Merkel and Brussels have outright already refused an EEA+ agreement that gives UK migration control, passporting and single market access. Ben Judah @b_judah What is passporting? All banks registered in UK have a "passport" that allows them to do business with whole EU. The City depends on it. Ben Judah @b_judah Base case is Berlin and Brussels plan to insist on an EEA- (i.e. a worse deal than Norway) that excludes passporting, migration controls. Ben Judah @b_judah This would however allow services to continue to have access to the singoe market. But not financial services. Mass migration continues. Ben Judah @b_judah This is formal offer. But Paris is planning a turn of cynical brilliance - that could at a stroke smite London and restore Paris to glory. Ben Judah @b_judah France cynicallly intends to offer Britain an EEA- that excludes passporting, but givs them a migration cap, and single market access. Ben Judah @b_judah This is a brilliant move: "you get less Poles, but we want your banks." It would be in France's interests to encourage UK out to get banks. Ben Judah @b_judah This would leave some stuff shirt like Crabb in a disastrous position: Paris and Berlin would have handed him a deal only "bad for bankers." Ben Judah @b_judah But the cynical French deal would be exactly the kind of cap migration, free movement for us and single market deal that the public want. Ben Judah @b_judah The next Tory muchkin leader would then be a hideous position: have his tax base slasshed at by loss of banks as his voters rejoice. Ben Judah @b_judah Paris and Frankfurt would emerge as enormous winners by ending passporting. Hugely boosting popularity of French and German leadership. Ben Judah @b_judah British public will be left moronically clapping the huge triumph of a few less Poles and the punishment for "bankers" and tax base slashed. Ben Judah @b_judah City analysts I met look with unbrindled distain on a Tory leadership class they think are simply muppets. No clue what's about to hit them. Ben Judah @b_judah France has already made this plan public. Hollande utterly clear on exactly what he wants Paris to grab from London. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e8e0c44a-3d89-11e6-9f2c-36b487ebd80a.html#axzz4CxmXutzs … Ben Judah @b_judah How will EU divy up the City of London? This is base-case: Euro-clearing to Frankfurt and rest to Paris, Amsterdam to avoid #Frexit, #Nexit. Ben Judah @b_judah Hollande is particularly keen to grab as many banks as he can from London: a sudden rush of banks to Paris could turn his Presidency around. Ben Judah @b_judah Will will a weak France get so many goodies? Surelt France has a weak political system and flaring Islamism and rising Le Pen? Ben Judah @b_judah It is crucial to understand EU must at all costs stop Le Pen winning in 2017. Best way to do this? Reward France the banks and their taxes. Ben Judah @b_judah That's all for now. Just remember what a glorious day it is! #VoteLeaveTakeControl #IndependenceDay #GoBorisYeah
I actually almost linked this series earlier. It's very good and fascinating. I would say though, that while the Party membership is factional, the MPs usually don't behave in this cannibalistic manner. Usually, even the Labour right is pretty loyal. I will say though, even Tony Benn's election of the leader didn't lead to this. Corbyn is the result of Ed Milliband's reform of the election rules.
So the stock market is essentially within 1-2% before #brexit. All the hoopla from the experts and media declaring this was going to be a yuge disaster ........ what happened? My guess is that the brexit will occur, but the wording they use will create a "soft landing" meaning the economic impact will be minimized. This really looks bad on the media and "experts." Will probably help The Don win the election here in the United States because people will realize that the threats of economic destruction due to his trade protection policy proposals is just a form of alarmism being sold by the media.
Saw this recovery happening in this approximate time frame. I expect the referendum to be overturned in some way by Parliament and that they stay. No way does this go through, especially if the EU takes a hard-line approach and they realize the true overall damage that could be done.
I feel like that fact that you're basing the results and outcome of Brexit in regards to the U.K. populace on the U.S. stock market is misguided.
Im thinking its close to 100% done deal they leave. But they essentially have two years to negotiate their exit and they can soften the language however they want. To ignore the will of the people would be disastrous so I do think they proceed. I just think all the alarmism talk was overblown.
Did the people know that voting to leave would cost them Scotland when they voted? Did they know that they wouldn't have access to the single market if they want to close their borders when they voted? It sounds like conditions will be different than many expected and it wouldn't be shocking for the voters' will to change as a result.
Possibly, but it's more likely their representatives do what is best and remain. Political suicide, perhaps, but sometimes you have to stand up for what's best for the country.
I feel as though that is wishful thinking. We will see I guess. What I was trying to say earlier is that since the stock market has basically shrugged off the results, I think that "what is best for the country" is much more debatable now. Since all the bad prognostications didn't come true, its much harder to sell that remaining is "best" for the country. Its much harder to sell that Trumps trade protection proposals will be disastrous for our economy.
It's only political suicide if they can't make the case that conditions have changed from the time the vote was taken and that the cost of leaving went up more than anticipated.
Is there a case for that? It was pretty clear that it would be potentially disastrous for the UK- A huge part of the rhetoric was to ignore the experts, governor, they are always wrong anyways! Scotland considering GTFO again can't be out of the question as EU membership was a significant reason why they decided to stay....
On Scotland, well yeah, everyone knew the Scots were going to vote to stay and were going to be outraged if there was a vote to leave. But, even so, polls still don't show a big majority for Scottish independence. Sturgeon is not going to call for another poll until independence is consistently at 60% in the polls, and they're nowhere near that yet. That's why she's doing this dog and pony show of saying she'll try to keep Scotland in the EU while still a part of the UK (while there's no chance of that either).
It's been like 4 days, rules. A little early to measure any macroeconomic effects the vote might have.
Germany has been waiting 71 years to get Britain's balls in a vice again. Most people seemed to think they would let the Brits get away with this folly, but so far it looks as though they and France are going to go in deep. (As they should)
They're going to talk big, but at the end of the day, it doesn't make sense for either side to try and pull one over on the other. Britain is too big of a market for German companies for the Germans to try and be vindictive.
Agreed. The politicians will talk a big game for reelection purposes, but end up making the right choice regarding economics.