We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
so who's gonna crack first? Farage sat a few down from Juncker thinks it's funny.
Show More
NO; i am basing my opinion on what content i heard & the tone of it.
LOL how the fooooooook can you detect tone when their speaking in a foreign language fed to tv by an interpreter
NON NON WE IS FINNISH - you read it here first
thank me later
at least I have a garage full of bully beef and beer
you lot can go and whistle
thank me later
at least I have a garage full of bully beef and beer
you lot can go and whistle
there has not been a single syllable of hope uttered by an eu lip today and anyone who thinks they've seen,heard a chink of light doesn't deserve an opinion,imho your just pretending to hear something to enforce an already intrenched opinion
one has to be careful when one is using the withdrawal method
Jan 30, 2019 -- 9:41AM, themightymac wrote:
May has not got the Guts to call their bluff.In business and in life in general, the one owing the money has the strongest hand.
There is no bluff.
And anyone thinking the UK has a stronger hand is dreaming. The UK isn't even prepared for no deal on the 29th March, the EU know this, the EU is far more prepared for no deal than the UK. On top of that they're in the stronger position to deal with it anyway. For them it would cause minor disruption, for the UK it would cause chaos.
People seriously think 39bn is a big deal to the EU ffs, it's chicken feed. And again the UK can't feasibly not pay, how will anyone do business with an increasingly unreliable rogue state that doesn't pay its debts.
Can we have an itemised bill for the £39bn please?
This figure has been plucked out of thin air, couched in the risible form of a 'divorce bill' not the memebrship fee it actually would be and demanded by the EU.
If it's chicken feed to the EU, let's not pay it then. Certainly I have not heard of any EU programmes that have been cancelled or amended to reflect the lack of contribution from the UK in the futute - mind you, with the EU's cavilier approach to audited accounts and budgets, I'm not altogether surprised.
This figure has been plucked out of thin air, couched in the risible form of a 'divorce bill' not the memebrship fee it actually would be and demanded by the EU.
If it's chicken feed to the EU, let's not pay it then. Certainly I have not heard of any EU programmes that have been cancelled or amended to reflect the lack of contribution from the UK in the futute - mind you, with the EU's cavilier approach to audited accounts and budgets, I'm not altogether surprised.
The MPs that are pushing to 'rule out' not deal are undermining the UK's hand.
Why are they doing this?
Because they want us to stay in the EU.
Make no mistake this is what people like Grieves and Cooper actually want.
They want to say to the British people 'you are wrong and we are right'.
For as long as the deluded remain types wield any power in Westminster the EU is going to cling onto the hope we stay in and keep paying them money for their fancy dinners, limos and vanity projects.
This means they will not do any serious negotiations until the last minute when it becomes clear that we are actually leaving on 29th March and they want our money.
They better get rid of their complete intransigence and do a deal otherwise there might well be a border in Ireland by default. The UK has moved so far and they have given up absolutely nothing.
Why are they doing this?
Because they want us to stay in the EU.
Make no mistake this is what people like Grieves and Cooper actually want.
They want to say to the British people 'you are wrong and we are right'.
For as long as the deluded remain types wield any power in Westminster the EU is going to cling onto the hope we stay in and keep paying them money for their fancy dinners, limos and vanity projects.
This means they will not do any serious negotiations until the last minute when it becomes clear that we are actually leaving on 29th March and they want our money.
They better get rid of their complete intransigence and do a deal otherwise there might well be a border in Ireland by default. The UK has moved so far and they have given up absolutely nothing.
They can go beyond that date of course ( and so can we )even if we leave in March because nothing changes in regard to trade etc for a couple of years at least
It’s a matter of leaving and then negotiating , it was always the best way
It’s a matter of leaving and then negotiating , it was always the best way
Yet more insightful,intelligent and no-nonsense views from one of the best posters on here (IT)
It’s strange when you think of it the ‘deal’ doesn’t actually amount to anything
Well apart from Britain paying 39 billion
Well apart from Britain paying 39 billion
someone on here doesn't understand French & reverse gear
My view is unless you are wealthy with plenty of foreign based earnings, or have one of the few businesses that will benefit from leaving the EU then you are an idiot if you voted for BREXIT. You are particularly stupid if you live in a deprived area like Sunderland and Ebbw Vale that receives handouts or are close to the breadline. The pound is already weaker pushing up the price of necessities. All public services will feel the strain more, from reduced business earnings and tax rake, unemployment will rise as a few businesses move offshore and the health system will suffer more so because it relies on EU workers. Poorer workers will suffer without the protection the EU gives workers (why the vast majority of Labour MPs want to remain, the clueless Labour communist leader excepted). We'll lose some EU immigration, but like the shortage of healthcare workers, they'll be the immigration you least want to lose. We'll still get the muslim wives and the like from the third world who don't speak a word of English and contribute negatively. House prices could fall significantly, which is a good thing, but then we'll all be poorer so in relative terms it might not make much difference. It seems to me that with the deal that is on the table we lose most of the benefits of being in the EU, and gain feck all, (effectively leave but not leave) just to satisfy the Tory pledge, because the reality is that the alternative no deal is much worse.
CLYDEBANK29
31 Jan 19 10:03
Joined: 10 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 8,491 | Blogger: CLYDEBANK29's blog
My view is unless you are wealthy with plenty of foreign based earnings, or have one of the few businesses that will benefit from leaving the EU then you are an idiot if you voted for BREXIT. You are particularly stupid if you live in a deprived area like Sunderland and Ebbw Vale that receives handouts or are close to the breadline. The pound is already weaker pushing up the price of necessities. All public services will feel the strain more, from reduced business earnings and tax rake, unemployment will rise as a few businesses move offshore and the health system will suffer more so because it relies on EU workers. Poorer workers will suffer without the protection the EU gives workers (why the vast majority of Labour MPs want to remain, the clueless Labour communist leader excepted). We'll lose some EU immigration, but like the shortage of healthcare workers, they'll be the immigration you least want to lose. We'll still get the muslim wives and the like from the third world who don't speak a word of English and contribute negatively. House prices could fall significantly, which is a good thing, but then we'll all be poorer so in relative terms it might not make much difference. It seems to me that with the deal that is on the table we lose most of the benefits of being in the EU, and gain feck all, (effectively leave but not leave) just to satisfy the Tory pledge, because the reality is that the alternative no deal is much worse.
Let look at this and rip it to shreds...
My view is unless you are wealthy with plenty of foreign based earnings, or have one of the few businesses that will benefit from leaving the EU then you are an idiot if you voted for BREXIT.
Kicks off with an insult to 52% of the population of our great country.
You are particularly stupid if you live in a deprived area like Sunderland and Ebbw Vale that receives handouts or are close to the breadline.
Follows it up with an insult against the traditional working class labour voters who have seen wage depression and a scrap for services due to mass uncontrolled immigration of cheap labour.
The pound is already weaker pushing up the price of necessities.
The pound is weaker due to uncertainty. The more the remainers drag this out the more uncertain things are.
All public services will feel the strain more, from reduced business earnings and tax rake, unemployment will rise as a few businesses move offshore and the health system will suffer more so because it relies on EU workers.
No evidence this will happen. Why will unemployment rise? We have record employment right now but wages are low and contracts are poor. If we have less unskilled labour coming in this will change. No point on having millions more jobs if they all go to foreign citizens who use our schools, hospitals, roads etc whilst earning less than 30k a year (net takers).
Poorer workers will suffer without the protection the EU gives workers (why the vast majority of Labour MPs want to remain, the clueless Labour communist leader excepted).
We do not need the EU as a benign dictator to protect British workers. we are capable of doing that ourselves by electing a democratic government to do as we wish.
We'll lose some EU immigration, but like the shortage of healthcare workers, they'll be the immigration you least want to lose.
Countries like Poland are under represented in the NHS compared to the size of their population here. There is no reason our immigration system cannot allow health workers from everywhere (as it does now) after Brexit.
We'll still get the muslim wives and the like from the third world who don't speak a word of English and contribute negatively.
Strange comment that has no relevence.
House prices could fall significantly, which is a good thing, but then we'll all be poorer so in relative terms it might not make much difference.
Would be wonderful news if cost of shelter comes down but to be honest their is little evidence that it will.
It seems to me that with the deal that is on the table we lose most of the benefits of being in the EU, and gain feck all, (effectively leave but not leave) just to satisfy the Tory pledge, because the reality is that the alternative no deal is much worse.
The deal is only how to withdraw which is not even necessary. We should just leave and then progress with a mutually beneficial trade deal. When you consider the massive trade surplus they have with us they would very much like access to our markets.
31 Jan 19 10:03
Joined: 10 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 8,491 | Blogger: CLYDEBANK29's blog
My view is unless you are wealthy with plenty of foreign based earnings, or have one of the few businesses that will benefit from leaving the EU then you are an idiot if you voted for BREXIT. You are particularly stupid if you live in a deprived area like Sunderland and Ebbw Vale that receives handouts or are close to the breadline. The pound is already weaker pushing up the price of necessities. All public services will feel the strain more, from reduced business earnings and tax rake, unemployment will rise as a few businesses move offshore and the health system will suffer more so because it relies on EU workers. Poorer workers will suffer without the protection the EU gives workers (why the vast majority of Labour MPs want to remain, the clueless Labour communist leader excepted). We'll lose some EU immigration, but like the shortage of healthcare workers, they'll be the immigration you least want to lose. We'll still get the muslim wives and the like from the third world who don't speak a word of English and contribute negatively. House prices could fall significantly, which is a good thing, but then we'll all be poorer so in relative terms it might not make much difference. It seems to me that with the deal that is on the table we lose most of the benefits of being in the EU, and gain feck all, (effectively leave but not leave) just to satisfy the Tory pledge, because the reality is that the alternative no deal is much worse.
Let look at this and rip it to shreds...
My view is unless you are wealthy with plenty of foreign based earnings, or have one of the few businesses that will benefit from leaving the EU then you are an idiot if you voted for BREXIT.
Kicks off with an insult to 52% of the population of our great country.
You are particularly stupid if you live in a deprived area like Sunderland and Ebbw Vale that receives handouts or are close to the breadline.
Follows it up with an insult against the traditional working class labour voters who have seen wage depression and a scrap for services due to mass uncontrolled immigration of cheap labour.
The pound is already weaker pushing up the price of necessities.
The pound is weaker due to uncertainty. The more the remainers drag this out the more uncertain things are.
All public services will feel the strain more, from reduced business earnings and tax rake, unemployment will rise as a few businesses move offshore and the health system will suffer more so because it relies on EU workers.
No evidence this will happen. Why will unemployment rise? We have record employment right now but wages are low and contracts are poor. If we have less unskilled labour coming in this will change. No point on having millions more jobs if they all go to foreign citizens who use our schools, hospitals, roads etc whilst earning less than 30k a year (net takers).
Poorer workers will suffer without the protection the EU gives workers (why the vast majority of Labour MPs want to remain, the clueless Labour communist leader excepted).
We do not need the EU as a benign dictator to protect British workers. we are capable of doing that ourselves by electing a democratic government to do as we wish.
We'll lose some EU immigration, but like the shortage of healthcare workers, they'll be the immigration you least want to lose.
Countries like Poland are under represented in the NHS compared to the size of their population here. There is no reason our immigration system cannot allow health workers from everywhere (as it does now) after Brexit.
We'll still get the muslim wives and the like from the third world who don't speak a word of English and contribute negatively.
Strange comment that has no relevence.
House prices could fall significantly, which is a good thing, but then we'll all be poorer so in relative terms it might not make much difference.
Would be wonderful news if cost of shelter comes down but to be honest their is little evidence that it will.
It seems to me that with the deal that is on the table we lose most of the benefits of being in the EU, and gain feck all, (effectively leave but not leave) just to satisfy the Tory pledge, because the reality is that the alternative no deal is much worse.
The deal is only how to withdraw which is not even necessary. We should just leave and then progress with a mutually beneficial trade deal. When you consider the massive trade surplus they have with us they would very much like access to our markets.
The EU and the UK will both lose out with a no deal but the UK is getting 4/6 in a no deal scenario and the EU is getting 10/11, so our negotiating position is ridiculously weak. Any amendment gained will be tokenism and amount to nothing.
Insider Trader most people are intellectually incapable of making a considered judgement. Most of those that are, don't have enough information to make one. It prolly leaves less than 0.1% of the population, some of whom will be only interested in self interest.
It's better to be straight and insulting than pretend otherwise.
The pound is not weak due to uncertainty. It's weak because we are leaving the EU, that is why it fell 10% after the vote. You must be thick to think otherwise. Uncertainty is an issue but the main aspect is the chances of a no deal. It won't bounce back with a no deal, it will fall further. If you don't like uncertainty then you don't want a no deal.
If trade suffers and it's bound to suffer leaving a trading bloc agreement then employment will follow as will profits and tax take. Business that need to be inside the EU will be forced to relocate. Another no brainer.
It's better to be straight and insulting than pretend otherwise.
The pound is not weak due to uncertainty. It's weak because we are leaving the EU, that is why it fell 10% after the vote. You must be thick to think otherwise. Uncertainty is an issue but the main aspect is the chances of a no deal. It won't bounce back with a no deal, it will fall further. If you don't like uncertainty then you don't want a no deal.
If trade suffers and it's bound to suffer leaving a trading bloc agreement then employment will follow as will profits and tax take. Business that need to be inside the EU will be forced to relocate. Another no brainer.
The Governor of the BofE is the man in the best position to judge economic impact and house prices. I'll take his opinion first. You don't have a considered opinion IT, nor are you anywhere neat the intellect of Mr Carney
Clyde you have a very short term memory.
Look at the chart from 1791 here:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/special-reports/from-5-to-122-the-200-year-journey-of-the-pound-against-the-doll/
It shows until just after the referendum. It is barely a blip on the decline of the pound since around 1937 when it was $5:£1. Since then the UK has been declining due to the gradual move to socialism in this country. The Tories now are more socialist than than post WW2 Labour government who set up the NHS. Nothing wrong with that of course if you like public services but it does have a cost to it.
Look at the chart from 1791 here:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/special-reports/from-5-to-122-the-200-year-journey-of-the-pound-against-the-doll/
It shows until just after the referendum. It is barely a blip on the decline of the pound since around 1937 when it was $5:£1. Since then the UK has been declining due to the gradual move to socialism in this country. The Tories now are more socialist than than post WW2 Labour government who set up the NHS. Nothing wrong with that of course if you like public services but it does have a cost to it.
Clyde, Carney's opinion,
I'd rather take race horse tips from Tracksuit Dave
I'd rather take race horse tips from Tracksuit Dave
CLYDEBANK29
31 Jan 19 10:43
Joined: 10 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 8,494 | Blogger: CLYDEBANK29's blog
The Governor of the BofE is the man in the best position to judge economic impact and house prices. I'll take his opinion first. You don't have a considered opinion IT, nor are you anywhere neat the intellect of Mr Carney
^
Haha.
Mark Carney has a terrible track record for predictions.
He predicted the Brexit vote to leave would lead to a technical recession yet we had growth and a 40 year low in unemployment. The guy may be good at somethings (answers on a postcard please) but his prediction skills are dire.
31 Jan 19 10:43
Joined: 10 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 8,494 | Blogger: CLYDEBANK29's blog
The Governor of the BofE is the man in the best position to judge economic impact and house prices. I'll take his opinion first. You don't have a considered opinion IT, nor are you anywhere neat the intellect of Mr Carney
^
Haha.
Mark Carney has a terrible track record for predictions.
He predicted the Brexit vote to leave would lead to a technical recession yet we had growth and a 40 year low in unemployment. The guy may be good at somethings (answers on a postcard please) but his prediction skills are dire.
If you are disputing the fact that the pound didn't fall because of the BREXIT vote then anything you say must be considered rubbish.
If you can't grasp the basic fundamentals then you are a lost cause on the subject
More 'because it happened subsequently it happened consequently' conjecture on a short-term (but then again, aren't all Leaver's scare-stories) item of detail
The pound fell immediately after the referendum Brexit result
however that is not the same thing as saying that it fell because of Brexit
however that is not the same thing as saying that it fell because of Brexit
The pound fell that day for sure. As it has fallen many times since 1937.
There have been many triggers to cause the daily movements but no one can deny the low term trend since 1937 is decline against the United States as they become stronger and we become weaker in terms of our economy.
I urge you to look at the long term charts before rushing to judgement.
There have been many triggers to cause the daily movements but no one can deny the low term trend since 1937 is decline against the United States as they become stronger and we become weaker in terms of our economy.
I urge you to look at the long term charts before rushing to judgement.
If you can’t grasp that simple fundamental then you’re a lost cause
It seems that there is room for manoeuvre . May is the problem according to le monde _ economics _ L'UE n'abandonnera pas l'Irelande _ last paragraph.
Hanx you are another one to ignore. You can argue about BREXIT, but obviously if you haven't the knowledge or capacity to understand the most basic fundamental any opnion on a the surrounding topic has no relevance.
As for Mark Carney. You have no idea of all of his predictions so that comment is meaningless. It is however obvious that anyone who reaches the position of the GBoE is amongst the intellectual elite and he is surely the person with the best information and resources and a plthora of highly intellect staff at his disposal. He'd make you lot look like Dumb and Dumber.
An analogy I'd use is asking Hugh Taylor or Mr Smith from Cleethorpes on who is likely to win the GN. Mr Smith hasn't a clue. At least you know Hugh is very knowledgeable in his field and will likely pick one of if not the horse with the best chance of winning. You are like Mr Smith. Not got the first clue but still sounding off why you think Hugh is a mug while you stick your pin in the paper or pick the horse with the name you like best. That's the reality
As for Mark Carney. You have no idea of all of his predictions so that comment is meaningless. It is however obvious that anyone who reaches the position of the GBoE is amongst the intellectual elite and he is surely the person with the best information and resources and a plthora of highly intellect staff at his disposal. He'd make you lot look like Dumb and Dumber.
An analogy I'd use is asking Hugh Taylor or Mr Smith from Cleethorpes on who is likely to win the GN. Mr Smith hasn't a clue. At least you know Hugh is very knowledgeable in his field and will likely pick one of if not the horse with the best chance of winning. You are like Mr Smith. Not got the first clue but still sounding off why you think Hugh is a mug while you stick your pin in the paper or pick the horse with the name you like best. That's the reality
no , some professions require knowvkedge and expertise
An electrician or a plumber or a surgeon requires knowledge and skill and expertise
An economist doesn’t , don’t confuse one with the other
An electrician or a plumber or a surgeon requires knowledge and skill and expertise
An economist doesn’t , don’t confuse one with the other
Clyde ignores everybody who doesn't agree with he's fear,like all lefties, stop worrying and believing all the scare stories clyde, honestly, for someone who thinks he's intellect is above others, you make yourself look a fool
If Mr Smith tried to tell me that the Gold Cup Winner had less chance of winning the Grand National than the winner of a low grade handicap at Plumpton who is 34 lbs out of the handicap then I would know to ignore anything he said about horse racing
I've only ever voted Tory fwiw. History tells us far left socialism doesn't work. However I'd sooner vote for Tony Blair than the current Tory mob. I'm hoping for the traditional parties to fragment
So you'd rather vote for a corrupt murderer who should be in prison for war crimes,and who lined he's own pockets whilst doing it, than The current tory government.
Thanks for clearing that up
Thanks for clearing that up
lfc don't confuse the limited skill required in gaining a City and Guilds qualification in plumbing and heating with the straight A's and an Oxford/Harvard/Cambridge degree in statistics or mathemetics needed to grasp a limited understanding of a highly complez area with many unknown variables, which is beyond 99% of the population.
Until there are charges it's all BS. Another area where you claim to be an expert. You are not in any position to make any judgement as towhether Blair is guilty of anything, so why post as if you are.
Not only is the value of £ directly impacted by the Brexit vote - 24/6/16 saw the biggest ever one-day fall of a major currency - the relationship continues to be proved on a day by day basis, as news of the spectre of hard-Brexit rears up or recedes.
Furthermore, the value of £ directly affects the wealth of every household in the UK and, as such, Brexit has already made you poorer.
Four obstacles inhibit people from accepting that the value of their currency directly affects their wealth. The first is invisibility: people heard news of "the biggest ever one-day fall of any major currency", but when they checked their bank accounts they found that their balance was unaffected. On login, the exchange interface that they saw was still populated in sterling and their betfair balances were the same ; most would have been unaware that its value had dropped overnight against someone matching their bet in another currency.
But if they had been conscious of becoming the poor-relation to 99% of folk elsewhere, many were unconcerned. Sure, most people like to "keep up with the neighbours" but so what if they were now poorer than JohnnyForeigner? Wasn't Brexit all about turning inward? "Currencies fluctuate", as Iain Duncan Smith said reassuringly. An ever lower pound was good for exports. Besides, there was nothing to be done; within memory the country was living with fixed-rates interspersed with devaluations - "This does not affect the pound in your pocket" - and a limit of £50 a holidaymaker could take out of the country. The legacy is still with us, for many, the exchange rate is just a fact like the weather.
So in today's connected world, where one can take control of one's pension or switch money anywhere in the world pretty much at the touch of a button, most people would rather not have that choice to make, because it takes them out of their comfort zone. They might get it wrong. Awkward. Safer to do nothing. Which is the third obstacle.
And finally, a lot of people need to be told what to worry about, and they're not going to get the instruction to worry about the value of £ from their usual Brexit-sponsoring sources. Not yet, anyway. If the currency was to be impacted by a Corbyn Govt, or the value of their houses were to fall 13%, the shires would be squealing like logs under a chainsaw. But Brexit is "the national interest" so they're playing it zen publicly, while in private Brexit-fundamentalists like Rees-Mogg and Redwood have long since shovelled money out of the country.
Furthermore, the value of £ directly affects the wealth of every household in the UK and, as such, Brexit has already made you poorer.
Four obstacles inhibit people from accepting that the value of their currency directly affects their wealth. The first is invisibility: people heard news of "the biggest ever one-day fall of any major currency", but when they checked their bank accounts they found that their balance was unaffected. On login, the exchange interface that they saw was still populated in sterling and their betfair balances were the same ; most would have been unaware that its value had dropped overnight against someone matching their bet in another currency.
But if they had been conscious of becoming the poor-relation to 99% of folk elsewhere, many were unconcerned. Sure, most people like to "keep up with the neighbours" but so what if they were now poorer than JohnnyForeigner? Wasn't Brexit all about turning inward? "Currencies fluctuate", as Iain Duncan Smith said reassuringly. An ever lower pound was good for exports. Besides, there was nothing to be done; within memory the country was living with fixed-rates interspersed with devaluations - "This does not affect the pound in your pocket" - and a limit of £50 a holidaymaker could take out of the country. The legacy is still with us, for many, the exchange rate is just a fact like the weather.
So in today's connected world, where one can take control of one's pension or switch money anywhere in the world pretty much at the touch of a button, most people would rather not have that choice to make, because it takes them out of their comfort zone. They might get it wrong. Awkward. Safer to do nothing. Which is the third obstacle.
And finally, a lot of people need to be told what to worry about, and they're not going to get the instruction to worry about the value of £ from their usual Brexit-sponsoring sources. Not yet, anyway. If the currency was to be impacted by a Corbyn Govt, or the value of their houses were to fall 13%, the shires would be squealing like logs under a chainsaw. But Brexit is "the national interest" so they're playing it zen publicly, while in private Brexit-fundamentalists like Rees-Mogg and Redwood have long since shovelled money out of the country.
Hanx you are another one to ignore. You can argue about BREXIT, but obviously if you haven't the knowledge or capacity to understand the most basic fundamental any opnion on a the surrounding topic has no relevance.
As for Mark Carney. You have no idea of all of his predictions so that comment is meaningless. It is however obvious that anyone who reaches the position of the GBoE is amongst the intellectual elite and he is surely the person with the best information and resources and a plthora of highly intellect staff at his disposal. He'd make you lot look like Dumb and Dumber.
An analogy I'd use is asking Hugh Taylor or Mr Smith from Cleethorpes on who is likely to win the GN. Mr Smith hasn't a clue. At least you know Hugh is very knowledgeable in his field and will likely pick one of if not the horse with the best chance of winning. You are like Mr Smith. Not got the first clue but still sounding off why you think Hugh is a mug while you stick your pin in the paper or pick the horse with the name you like best. That's the reality
That's cool, assuming you are still reading me
I couldn't understand your first sentence above, but divined from the rest of the post you were arrogant and patronising and I'm through with discussing this issue with peole like that, so mutual blocking seems in order.
As for Mark Carney. You have no idea of all of his predictions so that comment is meaningless. It is however obvious that anyone who reaches the position of the GBoE is amongst the intellectual elite and he is surely the person with the best information and resources and a plthora of highly intellect staff at his disposal. He'd make you lot look like Dumb and Dumber.
An analogy I'd use is asking Hugh Taylor or Mr Smith from Cleethorpes on who is likely to win the GN. Mr Smith hasn't a clue. At least you know Hugh is very knowledgeable in his field and will likely pick one of if not the horse with the best chance of winning. You are like Mr Smith. Not got the first clue but still sounding off why you think Hugh is a mug while you stick your pin in the paper or pick the horse with the name you like best. That's the reality
That's cool, assuming you are still reading me
I couldn't understand your first sentence above, but divined from the rest of the post you were arrogant and patronising and I'm through with discussing this issue with peole like that, so mutual blocking seems in order.
lfc I did a Macro Economics module at a poor University when I did my Business Studies degree, so I do have some very basic understanding of the subject. There were over 100 people doing the module and I got the highest grade. However, I was a numbers guy and considered it one of my non bankers, (considered the marking to be more subjective and that I was probably fortunate and was definitely surprised to get top marks) so didn't pursue any linked subjects.
Clydebank there are professions that require competence and knowledge and skill , such as an electrician and those that don’t such as an economist
Don’t confuse one with the other
ps u couldn’t give two hoots who you vote for , labour or Tory , whoever
As long as you respect the vote
That’s another little basic fundamental that if you don’t understand you’re a lost cause
Don’t confuse one with the other
ps u couldn’t give two hoots who you vote for , labour or Tory , whoever
As long as you respect the vote
That’s another little basic fundamental that if you don’t understand you’re a lost cause
By the way I agree with you , Hanx talking rubbish about Blair
"Not only is the value of £ directly impacted by the Brexit vote - 24/6/16 saw the biggest ever one-day fall of a major currency - the relationship continues to be proved on a day by day basis, as news of the spectre of hard-Brexit rears up or recedes.
Furthermore, the value of £ directly affects the wealth of every household in the UK and, as such, Brexit has already made you poorer"
Exactly. It's the first basic and most obvious fundamental. If you accept that you are likely to have not enough knowledge to make a decision (which is nearly everyone) but could have the basic reasoning to understand that, then the only sensible vote was to stay in the EU. People like to think they know more than they do on things, when it's really a simple decision. What do I know and where am I just a guesser. The simple failure to accept they are just guessers and the inability to grasp that basic aspect.
Furthermore, the value of £ directly affects the wealth of every household in the UK and, as such, Brexit has already made you poorer"
Exactly. It's the first basic and most obvious fundamental. If you accept that you are likely to have not enough knowledge to make a decision (which is nearly everyone) but could have the basic reasoning to understand that, then the only sensible vote was to stay in the EU. People like to think they know more than they do on things, when it's really a simple decision. What do I know and where am I just a guesser. The simple failure to accept they are just guessers and the inability to grasp that basic aspect.
I will try and explain again Clyde
The fall in the pound may have occurred as a result of the Brexit vote
It didn’t fall as a result of Brexit
The fall in the pound may have occurred as a result of the Brexit vote
It didn’t fall as a result of Brexit
Please keep it simple. Even the leader of the largest opposition Party looked lost and fed-up during PMQ on 'Brexit'.
I have no political persuasion but found this interesting on Mark Carney
After yet another humbling U-turn... Why does Bank of England boss Mark Carney keep getting it SO wrong?
His six-year tenure at the Bank of England has divided opinion
Admited he was too gloomy about the immediate impact of the Brexit vote
On the day of his appointment four years ago, Mark Carney was hailed by George Osborne as ‘the outstanding central banker of his generation’.
He was the rock star banker who said he was coming to ‘where the challenge is greatest’ by swapping the Bank of Canada for the Bank of England.
But his tenure at the Old Lady of Threadneedle Street, which will now run for six years to June 2019, has divided opinion – particularly since the EU referendum campaign.
Stage struck: Mark Carney was the rock star banker who said he was coming to ‘where the challenge is greatest’
And yesterday the governor was forced to admit he was far too gloomy about the outlook for the UK following the Brexit vote.
To his critics, it was just the latest embarrassment since the 51-year-old started the job.
As the first foreign governor in the Bank’s three-century history, he arrived in London in July 2013 with his wife Diana and four daughters to great fanfare. He took the Tube to work, arriving before 7am. But his pay – a thumping £874,000 a year, including a £250,000 housing allowance – had already raised eyebrows.
His flagship policy
The Canadian’s first big decision as governor, in August 2013, was to launch his flagship policy of ‘forward guidance’ as he sought to kick-start an economic recovery.
The idea behind this was to reassure households and businesses over the future so they could plan accordingly.
He began by saying interest rates, which had been at 0.5 per cent since March 2009, would not rise until unemployment had fallen from the level then of 7.8 per cent to 7 per cent – something he did not expect to happen until late 2016. Unemployment in fact fell below 7 per cent in early 2014 (and has now reached 4.9 per cent), but interest rates remained unchanged.
Previous role: Mark Carney was Governor of the Bank of Canada before he took over the top job in the UK
The unreliable boyfriend
In a speech at Mansion House in the heart of the City in June 2014, the governor conceded that ‘growth has been much stronger and unemployment has fallen much faster’ than expected.
This, he said, had triggered ‘great speculation about the exact timing of the first rate hike’.
It was widely thought that rates would rise in the first half of 2015, but in a fresh attempt to offer some sort of guidance, Carney said: ‘It could happen sooner than markets currently expect.’
The comments sent shockwaves through the financial markets and drew criticism from MPs, with one famously accusing the Bank, and by extension the governor, of behaving like an ‘unreliable boyfriend’ for blowing hot and cold over when rates would rise.
Rather than giving certainty, it was the first sign that Carney’s flagship policy could actually create confusion.
New rate rise warning
Despite his comments at Mansion House the previous summer, and solid economic growth, by July 2015 rates were still frozen at 0.5 per cent, but Carney again suggested this would soon change.
In another headline-grabbing speech, this time at Lincoln Cathedral, he said the decision over when to raise rates ‘will likely come into sharper relief around the turn of this year’.
...and then a U-turn
In January 2016, with a new year under way, Carney conceded that there would be no interest rate hike any time soon.
‘The year has turned, and, in my view, the decision proved straightforward: now is not yet the time to raise interest rates,’ he said.
With speculation mounting that there would be no change in interest rates until 2017, the Canadian said the decision would ‘depend on economic prospects, not the calendar’.
Carney also revealed that he may serve a full eight-year term as governor, having initially agreed to do the job for just five.
He told MPs that he would make a decision by the end of the year, but was urged by Andrew Tyrie, chairman of the Treasury Select Committee, to decide as soon as possible. ‘The sooner you feel able to give us this clarity, the better,’ he said.
Accountable: Mark Carney giving evidence to the Economic Affairs Committee at the House of Lords
Another flip-flop
Suddenly faced with questions in February 2016 over whether interest rates could in fact be cut, Carney was asked if the next move was still likely to be up.
‘Absolutely,’ he said. ‘More likely than not the next move in rates is up.’
But just weeks later Carney appeared to have changed his mind, and said: ‘We could cut interest rates towards zero.’
Joins Project Fear
With the EU referendum campaign in full swing in May, Carney warned that the vote was ‘the most immediate and significant risk’ for the UK economy.
Incredibly for a sitting central bank governor, he claimed that a vote to leave could lead to a ‘technical recession’.
His comments sparked fury among Brexit supporters as Osborne – the architect of Project Fear – said the intervention was ‘a very big moment in the debate about the economic costs of leaving the EU’.
His Brexit gloom
On June 24, the day after the referendum, Carney addressed the nation just hours after David Cameron announced he was standing down as prime minister.
With the financial markets in turmoil, Carney warned of ‘volatility’ but insisted: ‘We are well prepared for this.’
He offered to pump an extra £250bn into the financial system to stabilise the markets and said ‘we will not hesitate to take any additional measures required’ to keep the economy on track.
Working together: George Osborne with Mark Carney, both of whom were accused of being too gloomy about the impact of Brexit on the UK economy
Then, in August, the Bank cut interest rates to a new low of 0.25 per cent and warned that a further cut to 0.1 per cent was likely before the end of the year.
It also restarted the money printing presses, pledging to pump another £170bn of emergency cash into the economy.
Although Carney ditched his warnings of recession, the Bank said that the UK ‘is likely to see little growth in the second half of this year’ and pencilled in expansion of just 0.1 per cent in the third quarter and none at all in the fourth.
And crucially, the Bank slashed its growth forecast for next year from 2.3 per cent to 0.8 per cent.
Changing forecasts: The August inflation report (left) predicted much slower GDP growth than the November report (right) published this week
Growth surprises
By October, official figures showed the economy actually grew by 0.5 per cent in the third quarter – five times faster than predicted by the Bank.
After days of frenzied speculation over his future, Carney said that he will stay at the Bank until the end of June 2019, extending his term by one year, rather than until 2021 as many had thought.
Changing expectations: The Bank of England now expects inflation to rise more sharply than it had previous thought (Source: Bank of England)
Now more humiliation
Carney was yesterday forced to admit that he was far too gloomy about the impact of the Brexit vote on the economy.
The Bank raised its growth forecasts for 2016 from 2 per cent to 2.2 per cent and for 2017 from 0.8 per cent to 1.4 per cent. That was the biggest upgrade to a growth forecast the Bank has ever made.
The Bank also resisted another cut in interest rates, saying the latest ‘guidance’ it offered in August has now ‘expired’.
Carney even warned rates may have to rise to combat inflation.
To many observers, it was just the latest U-turn from the ‘unreliable boyfriend’.
After yet another humbling U-turn... Why does Bank of England boss Mark Carney keep getting it SO wrong?
His six-year tenure at the Bank of England has divided opinion
Admited he was too gloomy about the immediate impact of the Brexit vote
On the day of his appointment four years ago, Mark Carney was hailed by George Osborne as ‘the outstanding central banker of his generation’.
He was the rock star banker who said he was coming to ‘where the challenge is greatest’ by swapping the Bank of Canada for the Bank of England.
But his tenure at the Old Lady of Threadneedle Street, which will now run for six years to June 2019, has divided opinion – particularly since the EU referendum campaign.
Stage struck: Mark Carney was the rock star banker who said he was coming to ‘where the challenge is greatest’
And yesterday the governor was forced to admit he was far too gloomy about the outlook for the UK following the Brexit vote.
To his critics, it was just the latest embarrassment since the 51-year-old started the job.
As the first foreign governor in the Bank’s three-century history, he arrived in London in July 2013 with his wife Diana and four daughters to great fanfare. He took the Tube to work, arriving before 7am. But his pay – a thumping £874,000 a year, including a £250,000 housing allowance – had already raised eyebrows.
His flagship policy
The Canadian’s first big decision as governor, in August 2013, was to launch his flagship policy of ‘forward guidance’ as he sought to kick-start an economic recovery.
The idea behind this was to reassure households and businesses over the future so they could plan accordingly.
He began by saying interest rates, which had been at 0.5 per cent since March 2009, would not rise until unemployment had fallen from the level then of 7.8 per cent to 7 per cent – something he did not expect to happen until late 2016. Unemployment in fact fell below 7 per cent in early 2014 (and has now reached 4.9 per cent), but interest rates remained unchanged.
Previous role: Mark Carney was Governor of the Bank of Canada before he took over the top job in the UK
The unreliable boyfriend
In a speech at Mansion House in the heart of the City in June 2014, the governor conceded that ‘growth has been much stronger and unemployment has fallen much faster’ than expected.
This, he said, had triggered ‘great speculation about the exact timing of the first rate hike’.
It was widely thought that rates would rise in the first half of 2015, but in a fresh attempt to offer some sort of guidance, Carney said: ‘It could happen sooner than markets currently expect.’
The comments sent shockwaves through the financial markets and drew criticism from MPs, with one famously accusing the Bank, and by extension the governor, of behaving like an ‘unreliable boyfriend’ for blowing hot and cold over when rates would rise.
Rather than giving certainty, it was the first sign that Carney’s flagship policy could actually create confusion.
New rate rise warning
Despite his comments at Mansion House the previous summer, and solid economic growth, by July 2015 rates were still frozen at 0.5 per cent, but Carney again suggested this would soon change.
In another headline-grabbing speech, this time at Lincoln Cathedral, he said the decision over when to raise rates ‘will likely come into sharper relief around the turn of this year’.
...and then a U-turn
In January 2016, with a new year under way, Carney conceded that there would be no interest rate hike any time soon.
‘The year has turned, and, in my view, the decision proved straightforward: now is not yet the time to raise interest rates,’ he said.
With speculation mounting that there would be no change in interest rates until 2017, the Canadian said the decision would ‘depend on economic prospects, not the calendar’.
Carney also revealed that he may serve a full eight-year term as governor, having initially agreed to do the job for just five.
He told MPs that he would make a decision by the end of the year, but was urged by Andrew Tyrie, chairman of the Treasury Select Committee, to decide as soon as possible. ‘The sooner you feel able to give us this clarity, the better,’ he said.
Accountable: Mark Carney giving evidence to the Economic Affairs Committee at the House of Lords
Another flip-flop
Suddenly faced with questions in February 2016 over whether interest rates could in fact be cut, Carney was asked if the next move was still likely to be up.
‘Absolutely,’ he said. ‘More likely than not the next move in rates is up.’
But just weeks later Carney appeared to have changed his mind, and said: ‘We could cut interest rates towards zero.’
Joins Project Fear
With the EU referendum campaign in full swing in May, Carney warned that the vote was ‘the most immediate and significant risk’ for the UK economy.
Incredibly for a sitting central bank governor, he claimed that a vote to leave could lead to a ‘technical recession’.
His comments sparked fury among Brexit supporters as Osborne – the architect of Project Fear – said the intervention was ‘a very big moment in the debate about the economic costs of leaving the EU’.
His Brexit gloom
On June 24, the day after the referendum, Carney addressed the nation just hours after David Cameron announced he was standing down as prime minister.
With the financial markets in turmoil, Carney warned of ‘volatility’ but insisted: ‘We are well prepared for this.’
He offered to pump an extra £250bn into the financial system to stabilise the markets and said ‘we will not hesitate to take any additional measures required’ to keep the economy on track.
Working together: George Osborne with Mark Carney, both of whom were accused of being too gloomy about the impact of Brexit on the UK economy
Then, in August, the Bank cut interest rates to a new low of 0.25 per cent and warned that a further cut to 0.1 per cent was likely before the end of the year.
It also restarted the money printing presses, pledging to pump another £170bn of emergency cash into the economy.
Although Carney ditched his warnings of recession, the Bank said that the UK ‘is likely to see little growth in the second half of this year’ and pencilled in expansion of just 0.1 per cent in the third quarter and none at all in the fourth.
And crucially, the Bank slashed its growth forecast for next year from 2.3 per cent to 0.8 per cent.
Changing forecasts: The August inflation report (left) predicted much slower GDP growth than the November report (right) published this week
Growth surprises
By October, official figures showed the economy actually grew by 0.5 per cent in the third quarter – five times faster than predicted by the Bank.
After days of frenzied speculation over his future, Carney said that he will stay at the Bank until the end of June 2019, extending his term by one year, rather than until 2021 as many had thought.
Changing expectations: The Bank of England now expects inflation to rise more sharply than it had previous thought (Source: Bank of England)
Now more humiliation
Carney was yesterday forced to admit that he was far too gloomy about the impact of the Brexit vote on the economy.
The Bank raised its growth forecasts for 2016 from 2 per cent to 2.2 per cent and for 2017 from 0.8 per cent to 1.4 per cent. That was the biggest upgrade to a growth forecast the Bank has ever made.
The Bank also resisted another cut in interest rates, saying the latest ‘guidance’ it offered in August has now ‘expired’.
Carney even warned rates may have to rise to combat inflation.
To many observers, it was just the latest U-turn from the ‘unreliable boyfriend’.
He’s a guesser like the rest of the highly paid economists , they almost bankrupted the country in 2008
lfc fwiw as regards your plumbing and electrician analogy, I recall an incident in the sociology module on the course where everyone in the seminar had to rank professions by prestige and one of the professions was a self employed electrician. Out of everyone in the seminar I ranked the self employed electrician higher than anyone else, which might surprise some people on this thread.
lfc it fell because of the BREXIT vote and the expectation that we were to leave. I strongly suspect it would have fallen further had BREXIT been a certainty after the BREXIT vote, but as I don't know how much the markets considered it to be a certainty that's not a definite call. If it was considered 90% certain then it's really here nor there.
Whereas I didn't consider the job to be the most intellectually challenging, I gave more credence and respect to the fact that they were their own boss and had the balls to set up on their own than anyone else and remember arguing the point.
no it doesn’t surprise me that you ranked the electrician highly
The point is that many of the layabouts sat aroynd you were surprised
Now I know and know the pound fell after the Brexit vote
It didn’t fall because of Brexit
I can’t emphasise too much that difference
The point is that many of the layabouts sat aroynd you were surprised
Now I know and know the pound fell after the Brexit vote
It didn’t fall because of Brexit
I can’t emphasise too much that difference
As I said it fell because of the expectation of BREXIT
I'm not quite sure how anyone with any knowledge, even the guessers on this thread, could infer anything else
Yes , now that’s the difference , you see what you have to remember is that they cannot predict the future
Their track record proves that they are no better at that than the man in the steet
Not only are they incompetent , they are dishonest and biased
Put that into your little equation
Their track record proves that they are no better at that than the man in the steet
Not only are they incompetent , they are dishonest and biased
Put that into your little equation
Not much better than our MPs when it comes to that
They , well some of them , might have went to ox bridge
I’m not impressed with them either , sorry
They , well some of them , might have went to ox bridge
I’m not impressed with them either , sorry
You see there are professions that are and have measurable competence , such as a bricklayer or an electrician or a surgeon
And there are professions that do not , such as economists
And there are professions that do not , such as economists
Almost every one of our top highly paid economists failed to spot the banking crisis
They are the same ones around today without any shame carrying own with their bull..
They are the same ones around today without any shame carrying own with their bull..
unitedbiscuits
31 Jan 19 12:05
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 10,352 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
Not only is the value of £ directly impacted by the Brexit vote - 24/6/16 saw the biggest ever one-day fall of a major currency - the relationship continues to be proved on a day by day basis, as news of the spectre of hard-Brexit rears up or recedes.
Furthermore, the value of £ directly affects the wealth of every household in the UK and, as such, Brexit has already made you poorer.
^
The man who doesnt understand basic charts is back with his weekly nonsense about currencies.
31 Jan 19 12:05
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 10,352 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
Not only is the value of £ directly impacted by the Brexit vote - 24/6/16 saw the biggest ever one-day fall of a major currency - the relationship continues to be proved on a day by day basis, as news of the spectre of hard-Brexit rears up or recedes.
Furthermore, the value of £ directly affects the wealth of every household in the UK and, as such, Brexit has already made you poorer.
^
The man who doesnt understand basic charts is back with his weekly nonsense about currencies.
but the anti brexit propaganda is spewed out by their puppets on here - continuously and have helped to create the 'panic' narrative
shame on the lot of you
shame on the lot of you
all the financial commenting institutions IMF downwards have failed with their predictions including Carney
what happened to the emergency budget we were told we would need THE DAY AFTER if we voted to leave ha ha
it went to the evening standard
what happened to the emergency budget we were told we would need THE DAY AFTER if we voted to leave ha ha
it went to the evening standard
Says the man who needed four explanations from three people over two days to work out a basic percentage. What is it that you think you understand about basic charts that I don't IT?
the nutcase is now trying to entice labour MP's :
Theresa May is putting together a package of measures aimed at wooing Labour MPs in leave-supporting constituencies, offering greater protection for workers’ rights after Brexit and, it emerged on Wednesday night, cash for former coalfield communities.
The prime minister has asked two cabinet ministers to consult opposition backbenchers over legislation to protect workers’ rights after Brexit, although there is a fierce debate in Labour about how far to engage with the Conservatives.
Downing Street also confirmed that extra cash for deprived post-industrial areas was also under consideration, to allow “Labour MPs representing Brexit communities to say they have extracted something tangible”, according to a government source quoted in the Times.
As part of the charm offensive, Steve Barclay, the Brexit secretary, and Greg Clark, the business secretary, met Labour MP Melanie Onn on Wednesday to discuss further safeguards on workers’ rights.
The two ministers have also been tasked with drawing up proposals for enhanced environmental protections after Brexit showing how broadly May is willing to act in her efforts to persuade leave-supporting Labour MPs into voting for a revised Brexit deal.
Theresa May is putting together a package of measures aimed at wooing Labour MPs in leave-supporting constituencies, offering greater protection for workers’ rights after Brexit and, it emerged on Wednesday night, cash for former coalfield communities.
The prime minister has asked two cabinet ministers to consult opposition backbenchers over legislation to protect workers’ rights after Brexit, although there is a fierce debate in Labour about how far to engage with the Conservatives.
Downing Street also confirmed that extra cash for deprived post-industrial areas was also under consideration, to allow “Labour MPs representing Brexit communities to say they have extracted something tangible”, according to a government source quoted in the Times.
As part of the charm offensive, Steve Barclay, the Brexit secretary, and Greg Clark, the business secretary, met Labour MP Melanie Onn on Wednesday to discuss further safeguards on workers’ rights.
The two ministers have also been tasked with drawing up proposals for enhanced environmental protections after Brexit showing how broadly May is willing to act in her efforts to persuade leave-supporting Labour MPs into voting for a revised Brexit deal.
She may as well stand on a street corner selling fivers for £4.50 - in itself a pretty good demo of the economic sense of Brexit.
The man who doesnt understand basic charts is back with his weekly nonsense about currencies.
I mean, I've been looking at Betfair graphs every day for sixteen years - what is Insider Trader reading into them that the rest of us can't see?
I mean, I've been looking at Betfair graphs every day for sixteen years - what is Insider Trader reading into them that the rest of us can't see?
Jan 31, 2019 -- 10:10AM, Baphornet wrote:
the nutcase is now trying to entice labour MP's :Theresa May is putting together a package of measures aimed at wooing Labour MPs in leave-supporting constituencies, offering greater protection for workers’ rights after Brexit and, it emerged on Wednesday night, cash for former coalfield communities.The prime minister has asked two cabinet ministers to consult opposition backbenchers over legislation to protect workers’ rights after Brexit, although there is a fierce debate in Labour about how far to engage with the Conservatives.Downing Street also confirmed that extra cash for deprived post-industrial areas was also under consideration, to allow “Labour MPs representing Brexit communities to say they have extracted something tangible”, according to a government source quoted in the Times.As part of the charm offensive, Steve Barclay, the Brexit secretary, and Greg Clark, the business secretary, met Labour MP Melanie Onn on Wednesday to discuss further safeguards on workers’ rights.The two ministers have also been tasked with drawing up proposals for enhanced environmental protections after Brexit showing how broadly May is willing to act in her efforts to persuade leave-supporting Labour MPs into voting for a revised Brexit deal.
So openely trying to bribe MPs then? so why aren't the police arresting her for extortion?
Trump is openly rigging the stock markets in America and May is openly bribing MPs in this country
Because we know the average joe wont see a penny of that cash
i have been saying for months she may seek out Labour to help her.
She's betraying her own cabinet and party then
She's not even got the majority of her own sodding party behind her
This country is being held to ransom by one crazed old woman
You couldn't make it up
She's not even got the majority of her own sodding party behind her
This country is being held to ransom by one crazed old woman
You couldn't make it up
unitedbiscuits
31 Jan 19 16:18
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 10,358 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
The man who doesnt understand basic charts is back with his weekly nonsense about currencies.
I mean, I've been looking at Betfair graphs every day for sixteen years - what is Insider Trader reading into them that the rest of us can't see?
That was the one you struggled with claiming that a decline in EU immigration would lead to a growth in non-EU immigration citing 1 years data as your evidence.
You saw a correlation where it simply does not exist. There is no trend to back up your claims yet you continued to make them.
31 Jan 19 16:18
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 10,358 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
The man who doesnt understand basic charts is back with his weekly nonsense about currencies.
I mean, I've been looking at Betfair graphs every day for sixteen years - what is Insider Trader reading into them that the rest of us can't see?
That was the one you struggled with claiming that a decline in EU immigration would lead to a growth in non-EU immigration citing 1 years data as your evidence.
You saw a correlation where it simply does not exist. There is no trend to back up your claims yet you continued to make them.
Our negotiations on such a sensitive issue should be discussed from a non political viewpoint in order to decide what is best for the country,not party advantages. I am beginning to have grudging respect for May persevering and showing how obstructive the EU has been could be her trump card eventually.
You have to love Insider Trader's "lets start counting from here" (in this case 1991) game.
The evidence since the 2016 ref suggests that a correlation does exist between returning EU workers and a swelling mass of non-EU immigration, and logic backs the claim: returning EU workers don't take their job with them, it leaves an opportunity for a non-EU worker to fill the vacancy. We await next months quarterly immigration figures with great interest, do you think you will need help working out the % again IT?
The evidence since the 2016 ref suggests that a correlation does exist between returning EU workers and a swelling mass of non-EU immigration, and logic backs the claim: returning EU workers don't take their job with them, it leaves an opportunity for a non-EU worker to fill the vacancy. We await next months quarterly immigration figures with great interest, do you think you will need help working out the % again IT?
[ This image is no longer available. ]
How do you interpret this basic chart, Insider Trader? Do you see any correlation between the Brexit vote and the movement on the graph?
How do you interpret this basic chart, Insider Trader? Do you see any correlation between the Brexit vote and the movement on the graph?
You are correct: The EU do not want us to 'Leave'...they love our easy money too much. Juncker, Tusk and Barnier ought to have retired from politics some time ago, but for the gravy-train EU.
How can politicians of much smaller GDP economies be governing The EU, and in charge of 28 member states? Shocking! I cannot think of any other entity/organisation in the world this is happening to, but the undemocratic EU.
How can politicians of much smaller GDP economies be governing The EU, and in charge of 28 member states? Shocking! I cannot think of any other entity/organisation in the world this is happening to, but the undemocratic EU.
unitedbiscuits
31 Jan 19 16:59
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 10,360 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
You have to love Insider Trader's "lets start counting from here" (in this case 1991) game.
The evidence since the 2016 ref suggests that a correlation does exist between returning EU workers and a swelling mass of non-EU immigration, and logic backs the claim: returning EU workers don't take their job with them, it leaves an opportunity for a non-EU worker to fill the vacancy. We await next months quarterly immigration figures with great interest, do you think you will need help working out the % again IT?
^
Again UB does not understand the basics.
The two are non-correlated.
Unskilled workers from outside the EU cannot just walk into the UK and take a low paid job and milk the state in the same way an EU citizen can.
Are you seriously suggesting the same rules currently apply to EU and Non-EU citizens?
31 Jan 19 16:59
Joined: 27 Jan 02
| Topic/replies: 10,360 | Blogger: unitedbiscuits's blog
You have to love Insider Trader's "lets start counting from here" (in this case 1991) game.
The evidence since the 2016 ref suggests that a correlation does exist between returning EU workers and a swelling mass of non-EU immigration, and logic backs the claim: returning EU workers don't take their job with them, it leaves an opportunity for a non-EU worker to fill the vacancy. We await next months quarterly immigration figures with great interest, do you think you will need help working out the % again IT?
^
Again UB does not understand the basics.
The two are non-correlated.
Unskilled workers from outside the EU cannot just walk into the UK and take a low paid job and milk the state in the same way an EU citizen can.
Are you seriously suggesting the same rules currently apply to EU and Non-EU citizens?
But your own chart since suggests that there is a correlation since the referendum. It would be surprising if there were not.
What has that got to do with the value of £ and its correlation with Brexit? Are you saying that doesn't exist either? [ This image is no longer available. ]
What has that got to do with the value of £ and its correlation with Brexit? Are you saying that doesn't exist either? [ This image is no longer available. ]
Nice distraction trying to use a photoshopped chart with no axis to try to hide your ignorance over immigration policy.
I have explained the pound versus the dollar earlier in the thread.
The decline started in 1937.
Go back and have a look.
As for your correlation based on a short term span of a few months it is meaningless.
Lets at the reasoning behind what you think is happening...
Why is it you think that a decline in low paid immigrants coming from the EU will lead to an increase in low paid immigrants from elsewhere?
Do you even know how hard to is to come in from outside the EU?
Lets test your knowledge. Do you think it is just as easy for a British citizen to bring a bride to live with them permanently back from Colombia as it is from the Czech Republic currently?
I have explained the pound versus the dollar earlier in the thread.
The decline started in 1937.
Go back and have a look.
As for your correlation based on a short term span of a few months it is meaningless.
Lets at the reasoning behind what you think is happening...
Why is it you think that a decline in low paid immigrants coming from the EU will lead to an increase in low paid immigrants from elsewhere?
Do you even know how hard to is to come in from outside the EU?
Lets test your knowledge. Do you think it is just as easy for a British citizen to bring a bride to live with them permanently back from Colombia as it is from the Czech Republic currently?
I have explained the pound versus the dollar earlier in the thread.
Not convincingly. Whereas, each day the correlation between the value of £ and the fortunes of Brexit demonstrates itself anew. So, it won't help to play your "lets start counting from 1937" game.
Not convincingly. Whereas, each day the correlation between the value of £ and the fortunes of Brexit demonstrates itself anew. So, it won't help to play your "lets start counting from 1937" game.
Why is it you think that a decline in low paid immigrants coming from the EU will lead to an increase in low paid immigrants from elsewhere?
Not that the subject of this thread is immigration - let alone low-paid immigration - the answer would be that the returning EU worker does not take his job with him, therefore his leaving presents a vacancy. Which presents an opportunity for others, including non-EU migrants. Therefore it would be expected that a number of jobs formerly filled by EU workers would go to non-EU workers. A trend that the new-immigration policy is designed to promote, when it finally sees the light of day. The surprise would be if it did not happen.Indeed, it is happening already, and we await the next quarter's immigration figures relative % with much interest.
Not that the subject of this thread is immigration - let alone low-paid immigration - the answer would be that the returning EU worker does not take his job with him, therefore his leaving presents a vacancy. Which presents an opportunity for others, including non-EU migrants. Therefore it would be expected that a number of jobs formerly filled by EU workers would go to non-EU workers. A trend that the new-immigration policy is designed to promote, when it finally sees the light of day. The surprise would be if it did not happen.Indeed, it is happening already, and we await the next quarter's immigration figures relative % with much interest.
population growth nearly 10 million in 20 years not counting the million or so illegals - puts no pressure on anything at any time at all
I note a huge growth in overcrowding - just published- they are yacking on about it in the guradian so it must be important
I note a huge growth in overcrowding - just published- they are yacking on about it in the guradian so it must be important
Lol, you're not really helping your cadre, mo. But you're right, non-EU migration is rampant.
I have three cars and it is very cold. Will that stop the rubber boats. Have you any idea how cold the water is even in the summer.
I don't wear a cardy either. The housing situation is terrible in my area there are up to 60,000 illegals living in converted garages and sheds in one area alone - council figures - they even did a programme on it.
I don't wear a cardy either. The housing situation is terrible in my area there are up to 60,000 illegals living in converted garages and sheds in one area alone - council figures - they even did a programme on it.
Those illegals would not be EU citizens, would they, Mo?
I am lucky - I have no problem with parking.
You ought to get on a few trains into landan and listen to the marvelous multi cultural sounds
You ought to get on a few trains into landan and listen to the marvelous multi cultural sounds
Exploiting non-and EU nationals providing accommodation in converted garages ought to be outlawed and considered a criminal offence with imprisonment a deterrent; they are predominantly the get-rich-quick scheme of an ethnic minority.
It's an import from abroad; slumdog millionaire.
Is the forum under acute stress? It's so slooooooooooow.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539