Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[zugzwang]

27 minutes ago, crouch said:

You could argue it died in 1971 when Nixon came off the gold exchange standard and ushered in the fiat currency era.

But you just suggested that it was still alive!

[crouch]

Just now, zugzwang said:

But you just suggested that it was still alive!

When?

[dugsbody]

14 minutes ago, crouch said:

All currencies are now fiat currencies, as is the Euro. Some currencies, although fiat are pegged against others - free but managed as a peg.

The Euro is a common currency whose financial architecture is incomplete in some vital respects; it is unsustainable inn the long term unless those defects are remedied.

Fiat currencies generally do not last long; the Euro has additional pathologies which indicate that it will last even less time than many others unless these issues are addressed.

My views may be inconsistent in many respects. This is not one of them.

If all currencies were fixed, they would closely resemble the Euro. There would be no exchange rate and no fiscal transfers, the very thing you complain about in the Euro.

So I disagree, you are inconsistent.

[Riedquat]

10 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Expands to match the production of credit! Without FOM the economy's growth rate is severely constrained once full employment is obtained. Job vacancies remain unfilled, work that might have been completed remains undone.

Capitalism is really an argument for perpetual population growth! Degrowth economics requires the adoption of extensive wealth redistribution strategies and the scaling up of the sharing economy. I'd question whether the First World could move to a degrowth model with the human population expanding at its present rate. Thirty years from now, maybe.

That's all very circular reasoning, although from the tone perhaps you're just saying what it is (which I agree on), not that it's a good thing?

[zugzwang]

14 minutes ago, PeanutButter said:

You've mentioned that EU migrants have stopped coming here a few times - it sounds drastic. What sort of numbers are we talking about? I imagine there won't be figures for this year. 

The EU net migration figure is below 100,000. Essentially where it was before Osborne blew up his echo housing bubble in 2013.

[Bruce Banner]

33 minutes ago, crouch said:

In strict constitutional terms it was advisory. Politically it was not as Cameron made it quite clear that the government would act on the result.

It was advisory.

Cameron made an erroneous statement and resigned when he lost the referendum vote, in no way was it binding on subsequent governments. Fact, clear and simple!

[crouch]

25 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

If all currencies were fixed, they would closely resemble the Euro.

They are not fixed. That was one of the results of abandoning the gold exchange standard and the Bretton Woods system. 

And they do not resemble the Euro because the Euro is a common currency for 19 countries. There is no fiscal union; there is no banking union; there is no general deposit protection scheme.

25 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

There would be no exchange rate and no fiscal transfers, the very thing you complain about in the Euro

Between sovereign currencies there  is always an exchange rate as there is between the £ and the $.

Fiscal transfers take place within sovereign nations; the EZ is not a sovereign nation.

I am not inconsistent. I know exactly what I'm talking about. You obviously do not.

Edited August 8, 2019 by crouch

[winkie]

17 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Expands to match the production of credit! Without FOM the economy's growth rate is severely constrained once full employment is obtained. Job vacancies remain unfilled, work that might have been completed remains undone.

Capitalism is really an argument for perpetual population growth! Degrowth economics requires the adoption of extensive wealth redistribution strategies and the scaling up of the sharing economy. I'd question whether the First World could move to a degrowth model with the human population expanding at its present rate. Thirty years from now, maybe.

True.....will always require new people, always have, people have always moved......there will be world population growth until the population will no longer grow but will still always move......

[PeanutButter]

5 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

The EU net migration figure is below 100,000. Essentially where it was before Osborne blew up his echo housing bubble in 2013.

For who? Long term, short term, students?

[crouch]

1 minute ago, Bruce Banner said:

It was advisory.

Cameron made an erroneous statement and resigned when he lost the referendum vote, in no way was it binding on subsequent governments. Fact, clear and simple!

Bruce, pull yourself together!

You are right - it was advisory in strict constitutional terms. But, in this aspect it's the politics that counts and it was quite clear that the government would respect the result.

3 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

Cameron made an erroneous statement and resigned when he lost the referendum vote, in no way was it binding on subsequent governments. Fact, clear and simple!

Politicians are always making erroneous statements but if Cameron had said: "yes folks we've had the referendum; you voted leave but, you know it's only advisory so I've consulted with colleagues and we've come to a decision: we're staying - so there!" - what do you think the result would have been? I reckon Westminster Council would have a large bill for collecting debris from Downing Street.

[dugsbody]

9 minutes ago, crouch said:

They are not fixed. That was one of the results of abandoning the gold exchange standard and the Bretton Woods system. 

And they do not resemble the Euro because the Euro is a common currency for 19 countries. There is no fiscal union; there is no banking union; there is no general deposit protection scheme.

Between sovereign currencies there  is always an exchange rate as there is between the £ and the $.

Fiscal transfers take place within sovereign nations; the EZ is not a sovereign nation.

I am not inconsistent. I know exactly what I'm talking about. You do not.

Is anyone else able to comprehend what crouch is saying here?

He is saying it is bad that we abandoned the gold standard because that means currencies can free float and are not fixed. Therefore that implies he thinks we should not have abandoned the gold standard. 

If we had not abandoned the gold standard, they would be fixed. It wouldn't matter that currency A was worth 0.5 x Currency B, the point was they couldn't deviate from this. Essentially, they're one currency just different units. Also, even though they're fixed, because there are different countries, there are no fiscal transfers, no general deposit protection scheme, no banking union. 

Which currency exhibits these traits? The Euro. But crouch says the Euro is bad.

Perhaps try to be clearer because in my opinion, you're doing the typical brexiter thing of holding contradictory views.

Edited August 8, 2019 by dugsbody

[zugzwang]

31 minutes ago, crouch said:

When?

Here!

Quote

We still have - although this may be in the process of changing - a two party system whose philosophies are very far apart. A policy of long term planning is anathema to a free enterprise conservative who values the ability to change course and adapt to changing circumstances in a free market competitive struggle. The would say that planning is for socialist economies which, in the long term are moribund and are not conducive to economic welfare.

How do you bridge this gap to get an agreed policy? With considerable difficulty would be my answer.

It may be that the system will change to a more coalition basis in which case this sort of approach may be possible; but I wouldn't hold my breath. 

 

[zugzwang]

14 minutes ago, PeanutButter said:

For who? Long term, short term, students?

All individuals.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/bulletins/migrationstatisticsquarterlyreport/may2019

Quote

EU immigration has continued to decrease

EU net migration is similar to the level seen in 2012, following a decrease since the year ending September 2016 (Figure 3). This steady fall in EU net migration has been driven by a continuing decrease in EU immigration, a trend seen in all three EU groups (EU2, EU8, EU15). EU long-term immigration has fallen since 2016 and is at its lowest since 2013.

 

[Bruce Banner]

8 minutes ago, crouch said:

Bruce, pull yourself together!

You are right - it was advisory in strict constitutional terms. But, in this aspect it's the politics that counts and it was quite clear that the government would respect the result.

Politicians are always making erroneous statements but if Cameron had said: "yes folks we've had the referendum; you voted leave but, you know it's only advisory so I've consulted with colleagues and we've come to a decision: we're staying - so there!" - what do you think the result would have been? I reckon Westminster Council would have a large bill for collecting debris from Downing Street.

I don't know why you insist in adding "in strict constitutional terms" it was advisory, full stop.

Obviously it matters to the Tory party, Cameron screwed up big time and they will be finished if they fail to "deliver" Brexit, .....  Bring it on 

[winkie]

Ideally we should have had a referendum to vote on whether we should have a referendum......what we got was subject to question.

[crouch]

14 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

Here!

 

I've no idea what you're on about. The post you referred to was one about coming off the gold standard so - I'm lost!

[MonsieurCopperCrutch]

4 hours ago, crouch said:

One of the joys of choice is that you can choose to inflict economic damage on yourself.

Effectively of course, and like most things, this is a trade off. In any case I would have thought that getting to Eire was much more difficult than squirreling yourself in a truck from Calais but, then again, it's been a few years since I squirelled myself into a truck so I may be wrong.

One of the joys of being a retired boomer who has had his fill is that you can sit back relax and choose to inflict unnecessary economic damage upon the following generations. 

[crouch]

37 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

He is saying it is bad that we abandoned the gold standard because that means currencies can free float and are not fixed. Therefore that implies he thinks we should not have abandoned the gold standard. 

I've said in the past that the gold standard had some advantages but that's not the same as saying that we should not have abandoned the gold standard. Quote me if I have said that.

 

37 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

If we had not abandoned the gold standard, they would be fixed. It wouldn't matter that currency A was worth 0.5 x Currency B, the point was they couldn't deviate from this. Essentially, they're one currency just different units. Also, even though they're fixed, because there are different countries, there are no fiscal transfers, no general deposit protection scheme, no banking union. 

These matters are dealt with within sovereign bodies. They do not exist in the EZ because the EZ is not a sovereign body. Not only is there no fiscal union but anything which holds Germany accountable for the debts of other nations would not be allowed by the German Constitutional Court. This might apply for instance where the ECB incurs losses on EZ paper which requires a replacement of capital by the members.

 

37 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

Which currency exhibits these traits? The Euro. But crouch says the Euro is bad.

Bad is a moral term. I say the Euro is unsustainable because it lacks those elements which would make it so.

37 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

Perhaps try to be clearer because in my opinion, you're doing the typical brexiter thing of holding contradictory views.

No.

Edited August 8, 2019 by crouch

[crouch]

19 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

I don't know why you insist in adding "in strict constitutional terms" it was advisory, full stop.

Obviously it matters to the Tory party, Cameron screwed up big time and they will be finished if they fail to "deliver" Brexit, .....  Bring it on 

Because there is a distinction between the constitutional position and the politics.

You are confirming what I've said. If it was merely advisory why would the Tory party be finished if it failed to deliver Brexit? If people understood that it was only advisory why would they be so concerned if Brexit wasn't delivered?

[dugsbody]

21 minutes ago, crouch said:

I've said in the past that the gold standard had some advantages but that's not the same as saying that we should not have abandoned the gold standard. Quote me if I have said that.

You've said that the problems started when we abandoned the gold standard. 

1) Is it really such a stretch that I read that as you think it was a bad thing to have done so? 

2) Do you want currencies to be free floating or not?

[Bruce Banner]

15 minutes ago, crouch said:

Because there is a distinction between the constitutional position and the politics.

You are confirming what I've said. If it was merely advisory why would the Tory party be finished if it failed to deliver Brexit? If people understood that it was only advisory why would they be so concerned if Brexit wasn't delivered?

Simple, because a Tory PM, Cameron, misled the people.

[crouch]

1 minute ago, dugsbody said:

1) Is it really such a stretch that I read that as you think it was a bad thing to have done so? 

Obviously you're not used to dealing with subtlety.

3 minutes ago, dugsbody said:

2) Do you want currencies to be free floating or not?

In a floating currency the market is the predominant influence on the exchange rate.

Fixed rates are managed by governments not markets.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both regimes. On balance the ability of a floating rate regime as a shock absorber would lead me to favour floating.

[crouch]

11 minutes ago, Bruce Banner said:

Simple, because a Tory PM, Cameron, misled the people.

I don't see he misled them.

[thecrashingisles]

1 hour ago, crouch said:

You are right - it was advisory in strict constitutional terms. But, in this aspect it's the politics that counts and it was quite clear that the government would respect the result.

Politicians are always making erroneous statements but if Cameron had said: "yes folks we've had the referendum; you voted leave but, you know it's only advisory so I've consulted with colleagues and we've come to a decision: we're staying - so there!" - what do you think the result would have been? I reckon Westminster Council would have a large bill for collecting debris from Downing Street.

He could easily have said: "Yes, folks, we've had the referendum, but Northern Ireland and Scotland voted by a majority to Remain and we must respect their votes.  Given the promises of the Leave campaign, this will pose severe challenges for the union and we need to think seriously about how we can go forwards as a United Kingdom." 

[winkie]

EU or UK......union or united is not something people seem to want, they think they are stronger going it alone.....have to wait and see......we all learn from our mistakes.

 

Edited August 8, 2019 by winkie