Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by libspero

  1. This all reminds me of a very prophetic post made by particleman back in the days when QE was first being rolled out.. it had to do with the cycle of boom - bust - protectionism - war.

    I hope this will not prove as prescient as HPCs previous predictions of an unprecedented  “no one could have predicted it” financial crash.


    The rise in QE programs is what is steering us into a new decade of protectionism (the significance of internal vs external sources of production, and internal vs external sources of capital cannot in my mind be understated).

    Where we go next after QE, NIRP, and (my postulation) "walls up" (and overt) protectionism... well I think at this point I've already stated my view, here, in another thread.

    Needless to say, wars are rather capital intensive...


  2. A lot of talk recently about us joining NAFTA..  has this been discussed much on here?


    Apart from a few issues surrounding things like aviation trade-wars and Trump threatening to undermine the concept entirely..  it actually sounds quite a good idea.   It will be interesting to see whether the idea gains much traction..  especially since the EU doesn't seem very interested in taking Brexit negotiations seriously at the moment.

  3. 17 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

    Agreed. It's ironic that a referendum vote intended to distance the UK from the internationalist, neoliberal designs of the EU is being used to reinforce the internationalist, neoliberal designs of the Tory right. 

    I thought it was to distance ourselves from the bureaucratic, protectionist, overly socialist EU..  or at least it was in my mind.

    I guess we all had our own take.

  4. 57 minutes ago, Futuroid said:

    You guys crack me up!

    All the members of EFTA are part of the Single Market ('cept Switzerland which has a kind of single market lite deal - still has to follow the EU rules... https://euobserver.com/justice/136398).

    To join the Single Market we would need to allow free movement of people.

    It sounded too good to be true..  so perhaps you're right.

    The way I read the article it sounded like an alternative route to trading with those nations without joining the single market and having to deal with the headaches and bureaucracy of the EU.   

  5. I'm not quite sure I see why this is a positive for people renting (other than I guess everyone pays their share of tax).

    If you are renting a cheap room in an HMO doesn't this mean your tax bill is about to shoot up?  Surely the only time it affects the landlord is when rooms are vacant?

  6. 1 hour ago, GrizzlyDave said:

    I'm not sure I have the same view. I consider myself a European just not an EUnion. I also see the UK as part of Europe (and Scandinavia). There is far more that unites Europeans than divides us and most people I have met are very friendly. I enjoy French Wine, German Sausage, and Dutch cheese. Being inside or outside the EU makes no difference in terms of what I think of Europe. The EU and Europe are not the same thing.

    I think that is a pretty sensible view.

    Even after Brexit it would be nice to stay very good friends with our neighbours,  to trade with them, go on holiday to see them..  to a limited extent even have (managed) cross migration policies and relatively free movement of people.   In fact,  it would be nice to have that relationship with most countries around the world.

    I think (and I'm speculating) that what most British people really voted "against" was Brussels having ultimate control over our sovereignty.   We still welcome free trade with them and in most ways it is a common interest.  Apparently Brussels are more concerned with "teaching us a lesson" which is sad but perhaps unavoidable.

    I'm not sure most people are even anti "globalisation",  they just want to retain some element of control and self determination should they choose to.  That was why immigration became such an issue in the campaign.  

    UK:             "We want a temporary brake on migration from Europe"

    Brussels:    "Tough,  you can't have one"

    UK:             "Fine,  screw you then"

    For the sake of the rest of Europe,  Brussels should relax their principles "TEMPORARILY" to ease pressures where needed.  If they had done this the UK would have voted "IN",  none of this expensive separation would be necessary and we wouldn't be having this debate.


  7. 2 hours ago, One-percent said:

    Sorry, could not resist jumping in.  This is what democracy looks like.  We had a referendum.  One person, one vote.  The majority voted to leave.  Not leaving would mark us out as living under a dictatorship whereby those wielding power do not follow the will of the people.  It will be the mark of the end of this country if democracy is abandoned.  It will also signal the end of civilised society.  The country voted out and government would be stupid and probably treasonous in the eyes of the law if it ignored the mandate given 

    True,   though (playing devil's advocate)  there's nothing to stop us having a second referendum and changing our minds.  Not that having endless referendums makes any kind of good political sense.

  8. 1 minute ago, Dorkins said:

    So "borders closed" means "you need a passport to enter the UK", which is already the case. So what's different under your system?

    I presume a British one rather than a European one.

    I guess the main point is,  in all likelihood people would still travel freely from the continent..  the difference is they wouldn't have an automatic right to remain.

  9. Well this is bizarre.

    They are claiming turnout for 18-24 was 70%, a far cry from the 36% reported elsewhere.

    That is interesting.. though I notice the mathematics of the intellectually righteous doesn't always stand up to scrutiny..

    [from the article]

    More than 46.5 million people voted in the referendum on 23 June, which resulted in the UK voting by 51.9% to 49.1% to withdraw from the EU.

  10. My kids saw this story and said they would leap at the chance to take up the offer of a German (or any) EU passport. Of course, currently they *have* an EU passport - and all the working and mobility benefits that entails. While the Brexit deals *may* include freedom of movement etc (or Brexit may never happen), everything's uncertain and a German passport would make them very happy indeed.

    I doubt anyone would turn down a free second passport (why would you). The question is, are they prepared to move over there and work for 5(?) years in order to qualify?

    Most people already entitled to different dual citizenships never end up getting the second simply because it's too much of a faff.

  11. The problem with TTIP is very few know the details and probably no one outside of the European Parliment has seen the details,then those within the group that have seen the details are not allowed to repeat them verbatim ...it`s the secrecy that makes the deal look shady ... if it`s such a good deal why keep it secret ? .

    Because it's very politically sensitive.

    Here is a leak from the Independent:

    1 The NHS

    Public services, especially the NHS, are in the firing line. One of the main aims of TTIP is to open up Europe’s public health, education and water services to US companies. This could essentially mean the privatisation of the NHS.


    Imagine the stink if we announced we had to privatise the NHS because Europe were signing a trade deal with the US. Much better to do it quietly on the side over the past few years while nobody's paying attention..

  12. Why is there all this talk of the UK getting a Norway style model? As far as I see it, a Norway style model is the worst of both worlds. Under a Norway style model.

    Completely agree..

    The ideal (and if May really meant what she said in her speech the other day,the plan) is to aim for something more like the Canadian / Korean trade arrangement.

    The trade off is that we could be on WTO terms for a long time while the details are negotiated, where as a Norway style model is a "quick fix" on significantly worse terms. Europe would undoubtably be angling for the latter because that best suits them, the question is how much business would we hemorrhage in the interim period if we hold out for the former. It would probably be worth it.. but a painful exercise for a few years unless European industry really does light a fire up their leaders bums to push it through quickly..

  13. At this moment in time he need say nothing. I sometimes wonder what he does all day.

    Maybe, it's because his predictions of a collapse after a Brexit result didn't materialise, so he deliberately causes panic by opening his mouth, thus hoping to fulfill his own prophesies.

    I would say it's way too early to call that. I don't think anyone believes this won't be painful.. more a question of degree.

  14. Its between Gove, Leadsom and Fox, the three leavers, the others wont be elected imo,

    I'd say May is favourite now..

    And I'd agree she's the best choice.

    If we are going to negotiate a new relationship it wouldn't hurt to start off with someone who hasn't already pi55ed off the people we'll be negotiating with. So a "remain" campaigner makes sense.

    After that we need someone who is warm but firm with good negotiating skills and a shed load of experience.

    I hate May's guts, but at this time she could be the (wo)man of the hour..

  15. Back to the OPs very interesting topic.. The South Korea model looks very interesting.

    Would we lose our European financial passport still though? In the case of South Korea it is not entirely clear, but I presume we would:

    The agreement also creates new opportunities for market access in services and investments, and includes provisions in areas such as competition policy, government procurement, intellectual property rights, transparency in regulation and sustainable development.

    Obviously, whether the EU would cut us that deal is another matter.. especially with herr Junker's little personal vendetta against us.

  16. I think there are a wide spectrum of views on immigration on both sides of the debate, it would be naive to believe otherwise.

    That said, whichever stance we take will probably be a safe one for any political leader.

    If we have a points based system it will be a bit of a hassle to administer, but I'm sure it will do the job. On the other hand if we go for open boarders we will probably still see enough of a drop in inward migration as a result of recent events to placate those most concerned.

    Personally I don't love the idea of a points based system.. if anything I would prefer just an annual cap to stop large surges.

    The question is at what cost. The only thing that we really need is the Euro passport for our financial services sector.. and that will be the first thing that is taken off the table.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.