Is Britain about to leave the EU?

[really]

Financial services are somewhat substitable.

It won't be as efficient as it is now for everyone, but many in the rest of the EU just don't value financial services greatly.

Political populism might also pick on English bankers.

 

[Samson]

Bank Of England's Mark Carney - Hard Brexit's A Problem For The EU, Not Britain
This is an interesting argument being put forward by the Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney. The risks to financial stability of a hard Brexit really lie with the countries remaining in the European Union, not with Britain which is leaving. It's also not just an interesting argument it looks like a good and true one too. The essence of it is that London is the financial centre for Europe, as it was a century ago, and being cut off from the financial centre of the economy is not going to be good news for the EU countries.

My guess would be that these service providers will be able to move very easily, as they have already started doing. This is a lucrative business, and people will find ways of doing it.

 

[Gen.Mannerheim]

Greece would have been better off leaving the Euro and devaluing, there's no doubt about that. Yes, it would have been rocky ride in the near term, but Greek exports would have rocketed and Greek tourism would have exploded with a devalued Drachma, other sectors would have eventually picked up too.

France also would benefit from going back to the Franc, but obviously there's no EU without France. Without a Eurobonds/collective Eurozone debt arrangement (if Merkel stays in power in other words), the only way the Eurozone can really thrive is to have Germany leave the Euro and the Euro can then devalue, but this again, is unlikely.

EU's (and in particular Wolfgang Schäuble's) insistence on keeping the Greeks in the Eurozone smacked of reacting rather than responding to the crisis. Removing Greece (temporarly at least) from the Eurozone would have:

1) allowed Greece to get their affairs in order, which would cause a lot of money and heartache, but done so without causing massive damage to the rest of the Eurozone & its credit. Germany & friends could still do their negotiations and bailouts. And then after 5-10 years Greece could reapply for the Euro on a more solid fiscal footing.
2) sent a soft message to other Eurozone members that crazy levels of unstable spending would not be tolerated.

The big countries/small countries problem in the Eurozone are not going to go away. Europeans have had this crazy pipe-dream of a Continental-wide currency since at least the 19th century. However since Europe is not made up of some Jeffersonian ideal of equal sized states, a strong currency will always hurt smaller economies & a weaker currency will always hamper stronger economies.

Something has to change. Either the Euro should only be used by the stronger economies (Germany, France, Benelux, Austria, Finland, etc.) to assist trade, or the stronger economies should return to their own currency and turn the Euro into a currency that weaker economies use as a group to make themselves more competitive.

 

[Gigaz]

EU's (and in particular Wolfgang Schäuble's) insistence on keeping the Greeks in the Eurozone smacked of reacting rather than responding to the crisis. Removing Greece (temporarly at least) from the Eurozone would have:

1) allowed Greece to get their affairs in order, which would cause a lot of money and heartache, but done so without causing massive damage to the rest of the Eurozone & its credit. Germany & friends could still do their negotiations and bailouts. And then after 5-10 years Greece could reapply for the Euro on a more solid fiscal footing.
2) sent a soft message to other Eurozone members that crazy levels of unstable spending would not be tolerated.

The big countries/small countries problem in the Eurozone are not going to go away. Europeans have had this crazy pipe-dream of a Continental-wide currency since at least the 19th century. However since Europe is not made up of some Jeffersonian ideal of equal sized states, a strong currency will always hurt smaller economies & a weaker currency will always hamper stronger economies.

Something has to chance. Either the Euro should only be used by the stronger economies (Germany, France, Benelux, Austria, Finland, etc.) to assist trade, or the stronger economies should return to their own currency and turn the Euro into a currency that weaker economies use as a group to make themselves more competitive.

Schäuble wanted the Greeks out of the common currency, but Alexis Tsipras didn't.

 

[Takhisis]

How much power does Schäuble have compared to Merkel, let alone the banks?

 

[Kyriakos]

How much power does Schäuble have compared to Merkel, let alone the banks?

He is another figurehead.
What is scarier is that
a) people like that exist (ie a historical utter insignificance who currently plays head of EU)
b) this pitiful fossil is seriously -presented as- in power in a union of half a billion people, and far more importantly:
c) some europeans are so cretinously dumb that they still believe the crisis was caused by Greece. I mean if that is your audience you do fine talking to the Bild, cause your audience is morons.

Personally i am sure we won't stay in the Euro for long, but not because we will leave -- when Italy or France leaves there is no Euro anyway.

 

[FriendlyFire]

c) some europeans are so cretinously dumb that they still believe the crisis was caused by Greece. I mean if that is your audience you do fine talking to the Bild, cause your audience is morons.
Personally i am sure we won't stay in the Euro for long, but not because we will leave -- when Italy or France leaves there is no Euro anyway.

All the southern EU countries with their deficit style economies should not have joined the Northern countries with their surplus stable style economies.
In Hindsight it was impossible for these counties to reform themselves economic into German style economy short off what west German did with East Germany which is pour something like 2Trillion + into rebuilding over 20 years. Even now still East germany well behind West Germany and money continue to be spent. With many countries highly corrupt allowed to join the Eurozone and then expected to play by the rules was never going to happen. In fact German effort to punish Greece for falsifying financial records were blocked by France, which pushed for the inclusion of countries like Greece over the doubts of the Germans.

Germany should stop trying to reform Greece, Spain, Italy. it is impossible
Let them leave, reissue Euro into a new Currency we will called the Greater Reich Mark for the Axis Northern countries
Then have a rearmament program to spend surplus and stimulate the economy.
Then sign non-aggression pact with Russia ..... NO WAIT

Once UK as a Net contributor nation Leaves the EU it will become politically easier for other countries to leave or be forced out. Of course Germany will take a hit economically but Germany can afford to do so.

Countries like Greece will then be given the political and economic freedom to seek its own economic future. Better Greece remain a relatively poor, but stable country then have endless bailout crisis.

 

[Takhisis]

All the southern EU countries with their deficit style economies should not have joined the Northern countries with their surplus stable style economies.

Oh, but someone had to agree unanimously to let them in…

In Hindsight it was impossible for these counties to reform themselves economic into German style economy short off what west German did with East Germany which is pour something like 2Trillion + into rebuilding over 20 years.

Freudian slip?

Countries like Greece will then be given the political and economic freedom to seek its own economic future. Better Greece remain a relatively poor, but stable country then have endless bailout crisis.

Yes, but this is one of those situations in which a political goal/slogan is taken to be more important than the facts (economic, sociological, cultural) in the real world.

 

[Mega Tsunami]

I wonder how many people will start citing Mark Carney as an 'expert' once more, now that his words can be portrayed as sympathetic to the Leave cause.

Almost the same number as those who will start ignoring Mark Carney as an ‘expert’, now that his words can no longer be portrayed as sympathetic to the Remain cause.

But, as if on cue, in this morning’s Guardian there appears to have been a leak from a Barnier (The EUs chief negotiator) meeting and he at least, believes the ‘expert’ Carney.

This bit I particularly liked: [Barnier] stressed there would be “no aggressiveness, no revenge, no punishment” but also no naivety.

From The Guardian:

EU negotiator wants 'special' deal over access to City post-Brexit
Exclusive: minutes of Michel Barnier’s meeting with senior MEPs reveal he wants 27 member states to have easy access to London’s financial institutions
The EU’s chief negotiator in the Brexit talks has shown the first signs of backing away from his hardline, no-compromise approach after admitting he wants a deal with Britain that will guarantee the other 27 member states continued easy access to the City.

Michel Barnier wants a “special” relationship with the City of London after Britain has left the bloc, according to unpublished minutes seen by the Guardian that hint at unease about the costs of Brexit on continental Europe.


https://www.theguardian.com/busines...-special-deal-over-access-to-city-post-brexit

 

[really]

Yeah I saw that shortly after posting - I was too embarrassed to post it myself.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Yeah I saw that shortly after posting - I was too embarrassed to post it myself.

It seems to me that the position with financial services is far more complicated than with agricultural produce, energy sources,
IPR, manufactured goods or tourism; and there are so many subtleties there that I would hesitate to comment in detail.

Some financial services serve very useful purposes, others have little or no overall result, while others such as gambling
on consolidated sub-prime loan futures may profit some but were a significant public bad.

While it is possible to look at the impact of each possible change on a particular financial service, the problem is that they are
not necessarily separate and the questions of confidence in the context of interconnectness and the Jenga tower arises.

For instance there was a crisis in 2008 unrelated to any particular poltical event, and yet the City of London has survived world wars.
I remember reading a long time ago an almost surrealistic story that indirect loans from the City of London were at one time necessary
for Napoleon to provide his troops with the boots which completely contradicted his own economic embargo of Great Britain.

 

[Arakhor]

Well, of course both sides are going to compromise: I've said it all along. What the nature of that compromise is has yet to be determined (and it will never be "what the British government demands").

 

[Oerdin]

My guess would be that these service providers will be able to move very easily, as they have already started doing. This is a lucrative business, and people will find ways of doing it.

You are going to end up paying significantly higher rates to borrow money. Think about the consequences of that for a while especially on low growth, high debt load, over regulated economies with deep structural problems. The reality is major international markets rarely change thus why the big players a century ago are still the main players today.

If the EU goes down the route of trying to be punitive they are really going to drag their own economies down with higher borrowing costs for all public and private borrowers.

 

[AdrienIer]

Almost the same number as those who will start ignoring Mark Carney as an ‘expert’, now that his words can no longer be portrayed as sympathetic to the Remain cause.

But, as if on cue, in this morning’s Guardian there appears to have been a leak from a Barnier (The EUs chief negotiator) meeting and he at least, believes the ‘expert’ Carney.

This bit I particularly liked: [Barnier] stressed there would be “no aggressiveness, no revenge, no punishment” but also no naivety.

From The Guardian:

EU negotiator wants 'special' deal over access to City post-Brexit
Exclusive: minutes of Michel Barnier’s meeting with senior MEPs reveal he wants 27 member states to have easy access to London’s financial institutions
The EU’s chief negotiator in the Brexit talks has shown the first signs of backing away from his hardline, no-compromise approach after admitting he wants a deal with Britain that will guarantee the other 27 member states continued easy access to the City.

Michel Barnier wants a “special” relationship with the City of London after Britain has left the bloc, according to unpublished minutes seen by the Guardian that hint at unease about the costs of Brexit on continental Europe.


https://www.theguardian.com/busines...-special-deal-over-access-to-city-post-brexit

Barnier is a moron and always has been. He was a bad minister of agriculture in France, then became an invisible european commisioner and is now the only reason Europe might not be able to move forward from the Brexit. This guy's a walking disaster.

 

[Oerdin]

http://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...ending-free-movement-take-fight-to-eu-tuesday

Excellent news from the Prime Minister. This goes a long way towards clarifying things and makes the red lines perfectly clear as they should be.

 

[Arakhor]

If you read the Express, no wonder you hate the EU.

 

[Oerdin]

Hah, the typical attacking the source to avoid the content raised.

 

[W|M]

The content is worthless because the source is worthless

 

[Oerdin]

Well, that is a stupid attitude to take especially since it is not an opinion piece but an actual news report about the Prime Minister's upcoming speech.

Some people will do anything o stay in their bubble. Personally, I try to seek out a wide variety of sources but I guess I am atypical.

 

[Mega Tsunami]

The content is worthless because the source is worthless

Will this be OK then?

The Telegraph:
Theresa May to side with Eurosceptics in major Brexit speech revealing what she wants from negotiations
Theresa May will gamble this week by siding with Eurosceptics and signalling she is prepared to take Britain out of the single market and customs union.

In her most significant Brexit speech since taking office, the Prime Minister will defy critics by indicating she is open to a clean break with the EU.

The intervention, which follows immense pressure to reveal her Brexit plans, is designed to reassure the public and reveal what she wants from talks.

However the speech risks exposing deep splits in the Tory Party over Europe as she finally details her vision for Britain’s future outside the EU.

In her speech, Mrs May is expected to say that Britain must

Be prepared to leave the customs union to secure free trade deals across the world
Regain full control of its borders even if that means ending single market membership
No longer be bound by European Court of Justice rulings after Brexit, despite claims to the contrary
Unite after the “division” of the referendum by ditching the terms “Leaver” and “Remainer”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...e-eurosceptics-major-brexit-speech-revealing/

Or here perhaps?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/15/theresa-may-uk-is-prepared-to-accept-hard-brexit