The UK is Out - New PM - and whither now for Article 50

TheMadcapLaughs

eskimoking said:

Getting fed up with people saying the FTSE 100 has recovered and ignoring (or not being aware of) the FTSE 250s decline.

Ignorance helps the argument I suppose.

Until yesterday I hadn`t heard of the FTSE250. All indicators when things are going well appear to point to the FTSE100. So perhaps pointing to the FTSE250, now it suits, is a little unfair. After all, when the FTSE100 plunged after Brexit its demise seemed to suit the Remainers then. It`s only on the FTSE100`s recovery that people have started to point to the FTSE250. So yes, until yesterday I was ignorant of it`s existence because The Remainers hadn`t pointed it out to me.

TheMadcapLaughs

I am now frantically googling FTSE500 just in case the FTSE250 recovers ;wink

MrsGrey

TheMadcapLaughs said:

MrsGrey said:

MadCap, the problem is that in he global economy, others elsewhere in the world can make things much more cheaply than we can ...

So why do we make anything at all. Defeatist attitude IMO. And talking directly to manufacturers/importers the impression I get is that the cost gap is shrinking. Hence the reason I said "in the long term".

I didn't say we could make nothing worth selling.



These manufacturers/importers you have been speaking to. Are they experts? ;wink

TheMadcapLaughs

MrsGrey said:

TheMadcapLaughs said:

MrsGrey said:

MadCap, the problem is that in he global economy, others elsewhere in the world can make things much more cheaply than we can ...

So why do we make anything at all. Defeatist attitude IMO. And talking directly to manufacturers/importers the impression I get is that the cost gap is shrinking. Hence the reason I said "in the long term".

I didn't say we could make nothing worth selling.



These manufacturers/importers you have been speaking to. Are they experts? ;wink

Not experts, no Mrs G. Which is why I take their viewpoint seriously. ;biggrin

Pearces_Left_Foot

As much as I enjoy a good debate I really like to avoid politics and religion as they are the most divisive subjects going . As brexit will take years if it happens is it maybe time to close this thread ? and talk about football as this is a football website afterall . By all means continue if people wish I will just avoid this thread in future ;biggrin

grey_til_I_dye

Pearces

Think avoidance is the best move.

A quick glimpse at the threads on the first page suggests that this is moore than just a football site.

(See what I did there...?)

TheMadcapLaughs

eskimoking said:

Getting fed up with people saying the FTSE 100 has recovered and ignoring (or not being aware of) the FTSE 250s decline.

Ignorance helps the argument I suppose.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=^FTMC&a=11&b=31&c=1985&d=5&e=30&f=2016&g=d&z=66&y=0

You have piqued my interest Eskimo with this FTSE250 you talk of. In fact I did a bit of research as above. Seems it was considerably lower in early February than it is now. Perhaps the Chief Executive of Mercedes Benz stubbed his toe that morning and was in a foul mood. As I`ve said earlier, "the value of your investments may go down as well as up". Far too much reliance on markets as "proof". The markets are not the be all and end all.

Pearces_Left_Foot

Fair enough Grey

TheMadcapLaughs

I`ve just been thinking. Most of us want a fairer society. Most of us don`t trust the banks. Most of us hate extremism on both sides. Most of us abhor racism. Most of us want to do an honest days work for an honest days pay and provide for our families. Most of us (including me) want a bright future for our youth, and I include you in that Yeold. In fact most of us want the same things. which is why I find this bickering and sniping from both sides pretty odd. Perhaps Dave wasn`t so stupid after all. Divide and Rule, as they say.

Moojor

So Boris isn't going to stand for PM. Wow. So the man who was all for leaving the EU and could well have been the person to do that suddenly doesn't want to...

IronHerb

Boris has baled out to the leadership contest!

#notmyfaultguv

Colchester_Iron

Presumably he has stepped aside to allow Gove to carry the mantle.

IronHerb

More likely that he knew he couldn't win

Colchester_Iron

Et tu Gove?

IronHerb

Exactly Col.

House of Cards or what? ;biggrin

thornburyiron

As I said earlier in the week, the fluctuations in sterling and shares etc has little to do with the referendum vote. As my son's banker client told him on Monday he and his colleagues made a fortune, basically gambling. He said they could keep it going for months just by buying and selling when they want to. They could have used the European championships as a trigger if they wanted.
Don't trust banking or high finance.

ASLEFshrugged

I suspect the 1922 Comittee presented Boris with a detailed dossier of all his infidelities over the last 20 years listing all the children he has fathered outside his two marriages (inclunding the ones he has taken out legal injunctions to keep secret) and suggested that if he stood it would all go to Daily Mail columist Sarah Vine aka Mrs Michael Gove

NEoldiron

More interesting reading:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/30/politics-brexit-unlawful-eu-uk

TheMadcapLaughs

NEoldiron said:

More interesting reading:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/30/politics-brexit-unlawful-eu-uk

Thanks NE. I read above with interest, and it confirms my view further that we need less and less layers of Government and less and less layers of rules, laws and bureaucracy. If those at the top want to challenge the decision then I have right and justice on my side. And it`s no win no fee.....

https://www.underdog.co.uk/

MrsGrey

I saw that article yesterday, NE.

Personally I didn't find the arguments for judicial review on the basis of the motivation for the referendum at all convincing. The other potential grounds (ie. using this as the basis of the decision to leave the EU) I thought could possibly be more of a runner.

Of course, it is all theoretical unless a challenge is brought, which I think unlikely. But interesting to think about.

And it needn't be 'those at the top' who challenge the decision- that's not what a judicial review is. It could be someone 'at the bottom' who challenges it - that's the beauty of the system.

Unlike MadCap, I feel very strongly that we the people need an independent means (such as the courts) to hold the government to actions for their actions: their power should not be without limits and they are not above the law. (I don't believe that the simple 'vote them out if you don't like them' is sufficient in this regard.) ;ok

TheMadcapLaughs

And one final final point. Can people please stop using the words immigration and racism in the same sentence as a matter of course. It seems to be the assumption that if you have concerns over immigration you are automatically a racist. The issues of racism and immigration are separate issues. People from all backgrounds, whatever their creed, colour, religion have expressed concerns and fears over immigration and particularly an "open door policy". Whether it is their number one priority when considering the bigger issues is a matter for debate, of the people I spoke to, literally from wealthy retired country folk, to self employed tradesmen, to Polish delivery drivers, the issue of immigration came up very rarely and never as their number one concern. But it is an issue, not a taboo subject, and one that the politicians have ignored to their cost. Judging by the vote there are possibly millions of people out there where the question of immigration is important to them. But from my experience, and I hope it can be borne out by others experience, there are very few racists out there. Which is why parties to the far right have never, through history, gained a foothold in this country. We are a tolerant country, of which we are rightly proud, the word racist is being applied by association to vast swathes of people to smear and discredit and it is deeply offensive.

MrsGrey

It seems to be the assumption that if you have concerns over immigration you are automatically a racist.

I have neither assumed nor said this. (If it came across that way, I apologise.)

Nor has anyone else said it on this thread, as far as I can see without reading back.

I think you are being a bit unfair in your (admittedly reasonable, I feel) attempts to emphasis that not all 'Leavers' are racists and not even all those who gave immigration a high priority are racists.

However, there are lots of racists in the UK (I disagree with you that there are 'very few out there'. And lots of them will have voted Leave.

TheMadcapLaughs

Mrs G, you were the farthest from my thought when I wrote that, and I`m not talking about specifics from this thread, but there seems to be a general "mood" and feeling I get that the Remainers are the good guys, and the Outers are the bad guys. This is my opinion of course. But to me the issues of immigration and racism are two distinct issues but are often lumped together for convenience. Again just IMO. And excuse my ignorance regarding the judicial review system, but I would expect that someone "from the bottom" would possibly need to apply for legal aid, or are there no costs involved? That is a genuine question.

TheMadcapLaughs

In fact, I`m not sure that a legal challenge, whether instigated from the top or bottom, is a particularly good idea. The overriding image I have in my head is a couple of doddery old chaps in white wigs dismissing the opinions of millions of people over a couple of gin and tonics and a cucumber sandwich. Not a good idea me thinks. Although, given the image in my head, I think being in the age bracket I am envisaging they probably would have voted out anyway.

MrsGrey

MadCap, with judicial review, they don't review the outcome/the decision itself. They just check whether the process the body took to reach it was done within its lawful powers and according to the lawful procedures they are supposed to follow ;ok

TheMadcapLaughs

Thanks Mrs G ;ok

NEoldiron

What I still fail to understand is how the result of a referendum which was only advisory and not legally binding has been taken to the point we're at now.

If there was a similar referendum (advisory and not legally binding) about the re-introduction of capital punishment and a similarly small majority wished for said re-introduction, it does not then mean that it would return. Parliament would take into account the "will of the people"'s referendum result but there would be no obligation to act on it.

If Brexit goes ahead there will probably be the unintended consequence of the break up of the UK.
If a second referendum was held under the current political and economic situation and ramifications caused by the result of the first, and with the knowledge that if we want to retain access to the single market we still have to accept freedom of movement but now with a poorer economy, would the Leavers again be in the majority - I don't think so.

MrsGrey

I see Gove is saying the NHS will (if he is given the job as PM) get £100m per week in additional funding.

Can he actually make that commitment? Does he have the power to bind the govt to such a promise? ;hmm

(Edit: by 2020, he says. Which given that he's saying Article 50 won't be invoked until 2017 at the earliest, is also a bit of a hostage to fortune, don't you think?)


(Another edit: although I suppose since that 2020 deadline is perhaps going to be AFTER the next General Election, he might not have to deliver on it. Depending on circumstances.)

IronHerb

Aaah! Promises, promises. ;lol

Tomw85

In positive news today both HSBC and Barclays have confirmed that they will be remaining in the UK. The FTSE 100 continues to climb as does the FTSE 250 all be it at a slower rate.

Gove has ruined both his and Boris's chances of being PM so looks like Teresa May will be the next PM and she campaigned (weakly) for a remain vote so hopefully that will make some of the remain voters feel a little better about things.