- This topic has 67 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 10 months ago by
.
- Posts
Just hope the young aren’t hit if recession hits (or should that be “when”?).
It will take those tipsters who like to title themselves psephologists some time to analyse and spew some hard data but turnout amongst the 18-24’s is rumoured to be 35-45% and over 80% in the over 65s
That being the case and given the received wisdom is that the young are ‘overwhelmingly’ for Remain then they have no one else to blame but themselves for us leaving; and if I hear one more bright-eyed naiive youth blame the ‘selfish baby boomers’ for exit I might do something violent (actually just a forceful two fingers)
Gingerpercent, I’m intrigued to learn that the vote to leave was a loser for you, had you not traded out after Newcastle and Sunderland
As I mentioned earlier it seemed clear cut to me from the outset of the campaign that all the value bets were in the Leave markets
Voted Remain, bet Leave. Heart and Head: for the bettor ne’er the twain shall meet
Mr Johnson said Britain would always be “part of Europe” and “there will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market”.
So, to get this deal will mean free movement of people within the EU or does Boris think he can get a better deal somehow?
The last few days have been quite depressing.
Just hope the young aren’t hit if recession hits (or should that be “when”?).
It will take those tipsters who like to title themselves psephologists some time to analyse and spew some hard data but turnout amongst the 18-24’s is rumoured to be 35-45% and over 80% in the over 65s
That being the case and given the received wisdom is that the young are ‘overwhelmingly’ for Remain then they have no one else to blame but themselves for us leaving; and if I hear one more bright-eyed naiive youth blame the ‘selfish baby boomers’ for exit I might do something violent (actually just a forceful two fingers)
Gingerpercent, I’m intrigued to learn that the vote to leave was a loser for you, had you not traded out after Newcastle and Sunderland
As I mentioned earlier it seemed clear cut to me from the outset of the campaign that all the value bets were in the Leave markets
Voted Remain, bet Leave. Heart and Head: for the bettor ne’er the twain shall meet
Do I see another aftertimer before me. :lol:
Traded out as much as I could King B, around 75% of my earlier “In” bets.
Those that did not vote hold a big responsibility for what is to come. But the youth – by nature – are inexperienced and therefore some will be “naive”. What is the excuse for the older generation?
The older generation have (on the whole) had good lives and yet in these difficult times pensions keep going up in line with inflation. The youth are not going to have the prospects of “babyboomers” and more needs to be done to protect the youth’s prospects/interests/pockets. Grandad has shot his grandchild in the foot.
Value Is EverythingThe vote was actually won by the tabloid press. Years of Migration scaremongering including 75 million Turks been allowed to come to Britain when they join the EU
The Out Labour voters have probably just voted in the most right-wing Tory Cabinet ever
Boris has actually cocked up. He would have more likely become PM in the next term if the Leave campaign had lost 52-48. Some of the Tories will be gunning for him now.
At least Corbyn told the truth regarding the EU. How can you back something to the hilt if you are not confident in it. Whilst Boris had “the most difficult decision of his life” to join the Leave campaign and then went full on in trying to secure the public vote with lies. Probably cost Corbyn his job though if it hasn’t already.
The Government will now try to stretch this out as along as possible as no work has been done towards the Brexit. They had no idea the public was going to vote that way and has come as a major shock to them.
I guess now we just leave them to balls it all up for Britain
Fairly clear which way it was going once the Newcastle result came in and pretty much confirmed by Sunderland, thankfully got out of most of my bets.
Can’t believe so many people were taken in by lies.
Just hope the young aren’t hit if recession hits (or should that be “when”?).
The poor say “it couldn’t get any worse than it is already”…. Oh it can!
Some people must have been so disappointed, voting to return to the 1950’s/60’s on Thursday, only to wake up on Friday and find themselves still pensioners.
It seems turkeys really do vote for Christmas.
Not only voted for Christmas but got told the next day they “misunderstood” that Vote Leave actually have no plans to reduce migration at all, just choose different migrants; the bus advert extra money for the NHS also was a “mistake” – there is no money; Vote Leave Boris in no hurry to leave EU and may not even start talks until 2020; “we want to be able to elect or kick out our own politicians – so Cameron kicks himself out after promising and elected to stay on to 2020; “get our democracy back” means an elitist Bullingdon Boy will likely be your next PM with the UK having absolutely no say. UK will be better off from day one- £ falls 30%.
The biggest con of the public in UK election history.
Agreed Robert, the referendum was fought with lies.
As a Conservative “Remainer”, am now looking for someone to vote for in the next General Election with a clear “No Exit” manifesto – so probably vote Liberal next time.
If Labour got rid of Corbyn and changed their Trotskyist leanings – you could even see them winning an election held in a recession.
Boris is popular now, but if (when) the country lurches in to recession in the near future, he won’t be anywhere near as popular… AND the number of British people in favour of “Brexit” will no longer be a majority.
Should the Government continue with Brexit if 70% of British People were then NOT in favour of Brexit?
Value Is EverythingDo I see another aftertimer before me.
Traded out as much as I could King B, around 75% of my earlier “In” bets.
Those that did not vote hold a big responsibility for what is to come. But the youth – by nature – are inexperienced and therefore some will be “naive”. What is the excuse for the older generation?
The older generation have (on the whole) had good lives and yet in these difficult times pensions keep going up in line with inflation. The youth are not going to have the prospects of “babyboomers” and more needs to be done to protect the youth’s prospects/interests/pockets. Grandad has shot his grandchild in the foot.
In days of yore the Lounge would have been buzzing with Referendum debate but you’ll have to go where the horses talk politics for 52 pages of chit-chat and my beforetiming. Some bright but generally far too sure of themselves correspondents on there
Although I was a somewhat wishy-washy Remain voter swung that way not so much by the economic consequences for the UK but by concern for what might happen in Europe if we left I do hold with the maxim ‘there’s no point getting older if you don’t get wiser’ so most certainly do not tarnish all ‘baby boomers’ who voted leave with the label of selfishness. My peers in that demographic have 40+ years experience of being in the Common Market, then EEC, then EU and in my opinion experience counts for a lot in elections. Therefore taken en-masse I respect their decision even if I don’t agree with it
I do agree that we baby boomers had and have the best of times and it was a carnival that was unsustainable. So in that respect we owe an apology to the young: we had our cake and ate it too
What a shame the SNP won’t field candidates across the UK. Sturgeon is the only leader left with any degree of credibility. If they suspended their key objective for a few years, she could probably knock the country back into shape in fairly short order
For any betting person it is better to do the research yourself when you can. It was interesting that there was a great similarity between the strategy of both sides about how to get more people voting for “Us”. The remain side chose: “We cannot see over that big hill, but there might be monsters there.” The leave side chose: “We can see these really nuisance things that have happened in the last few years, and they could get worse if we don’t stop them.” It is worth reading Nobel prize winner Daniel Kahneman’s books about how humans think, especially about how we are all much more risk averse than we ought to be. Convincing the voters seems to be about who can scare them the most, and it seems that existential risks are more scary than potential ones. Maybe older people are more difficult to scare than younger people. Who would have thought that politics could be such an emotive subject.
I expect that less than one percent of the voting population went to look for the basic data for themselves. For a reality check, at least on the trading/economics aspect, have a look at http://www.tradingeconomics.com. and see what has been happening in the last ten years for any and all countries and trading blocks. Why is the UK spending 45% of its export effort on a group of countries that represent only 15% of world GDP, especially when the UK economy is 80% services and only 20% goods? Compare the rate of GDP growth in developing countries with that of developed countries and what that inevitably means for UK trade in the future. How will the EU countries’ economies cope in growing their GDP in the next decade with having current youth unemployment rates such as Sweden 18%, Finland 22%, France 23%, Belgium 24%, Spain 27%, Italy 37%, and they are by no means the worst?
Outside the statistical realm: Why does the EU have no trading deals with China, India, Japan, USA, Canada, etc. and have to rely on World Trade Organisation rules on tariffs?
I am glad that Gingertipster follows the data in his horse-race betting and tries not to let emotion get the better of him. I see that the FTSE 100 has today fallen to the level it was ten days ago. Difficult times indeed; we might all have to hand over more of our earnings to help these destitute companies provide the capital growth and dividend income necessary to maintain pensions at their current levels. At least I am happier now that I no longer pay income tax or VAT; both tax rates are now effectively zero because all the taxes I pay to the government come back to me in the form of new roads, military equipment, hospitals, schools, in much the same way that 50% of the taxes we pay to the EU come back to us in the form of cultural grants, infrastructure investments, regional development projects,etc. I am not quite sure where the other 50% goes because for twenty years running the auditors of EU finances have refused to sign off their book-keeping because the EU cannot organize themselves into recording where they spent the money. At least Ginger keeps immaculate records, because they contribute greatly to his success.
@Marginal Value
Canada is in the process of an trade agreement with the EU:
The negotiations for the deal were completed in September 2014. It needs all 28 EU countries to agree it. That seems to be the problem for all the big-country trade deals with the EU. For example Germany’s Economy Minister “objected strenuously this week to a clause in the deal that would allow companies to sue governments if they felt their rights had been infringed.” The “this week” referred to was the very first week after negotiations were completed. No apparent progress has been made so far. The European Parliament is also not happy with this clause, and several others.
This is the pattern with EU trade deals, the EU has been in negotiation and talks with all the big countries and has issued encouraging messages from time to time. The EU has been keen to get trade deals for decades, but being keen and being successful are two different things. Part of this is not directly the fault of the EU; the deal with India has been hit with all sorts of issues, including Italy not being happy with a free trade deal which includes leather goods. Italy is a specialist in the EU in leather goods but their industry is dwarfed by the Indian leather industry, so Italy is scared that it would be swamped. With 28 countries each with several specific industries having to compete with big boys (USA, India, China, Japan, etc) on a free-tariff level playing field is scary for them. When it comes to “my back yard” globalisation stops when everyone has a veto.
You could also quote, among many, many others:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/globalbusiness/8408748/EU-India-free-trade-deal-delayed.htmlwhich is from 2011 about the India EU trade deal. “it may not be signed before the end of the year or early 2012.” It is now 2016 and still no deal. Just like all the other deals with important big-boy countries.
Interesting final paragraph:
“EU officials said they do not want to compromise on substance for the sake of rushing into a deal. “We don’t want a rush to conclude in May if the result is things we care about stay in the too difficult tray or left for the next trade agreement. This is the two biggest bureaucracies in the world coming together to negotiate on things which matter. We want to get the substance right because the chance to get it right might not come again for several years,” said one official. “However it is fascinating, for the new UK position, that all these countries still manage to trade with each other. Who needs trade deals? Check out Professor Patrick Minford.
I suspect that many Leave voters were not voting FOR something, but against something. What that something was would cover a pretty wide spectrum
Hope the link works. An interesting analysis in US publication by a Scottish journalist (editor of The Spectator). What’s just as interesting are the readers’ comments beneath the article.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/brexit-a-very-british-revolution-1466800383?tesla=y&mod=e2tw
On a slight tangent, I managed a wry smile at LibDem leader Tim Farron’s deep anger and disappointment at the vote. He represents a party that, in 2010, included in its manifesto the pledge to have a referendum on our EU membership. When, to their surprise the LibDems ended up in a coalition government they forgot all about this pledge as they never really wanted one anyway. Maybe if they’d pushed for that manifesto pledge and got a referendum during the coalition’s term, we’d have voted to remain! It’s a funny old world.
I wouldn’t pay too much attention to the opinions of the ratings agencies, Ginger.
Wasn’t so long ago they were triple A’ing the rolled up subprime loans of Kentucky Fried Chicken workers. Solid.
The neo-liberal “trickle-down” doctrine of cheap labour, low wages and austerity has killed growth to such an extent, the financial industry has left itself almost no option but to park money with Governments not yet reduced to banana status.
Of which the UK remains one.
Britain’s AAA rating now gone.
Both Fitch and Moody’s cut their credit rating for UK sometime ago, from to AAA to AA+ and Aa1 respectively and few batted an eyelid
You’re referring to the move by Standard & Poors who cut it today from AAA to AA
I won’t be losing too much sleep over it
edit: spot on CR
I’ve long since stopped having “fun bets” (discipline) and “spot-laying” (poor-house fast track) so I had no financial interest in the outcome of Brexit at all.
I did keep an eye on the “GBP-versus” currency markets from abut 9:30pm to 10:30pm on Thursday evening, and would have been alarmed at the prospects of a remain vote (particularly at around 1.08), given the pound had almost remained static against most major currencies during the day.
In hindsight perhaps this market had hedge fund written all over it. A few large bets sent into the market to manipulate the price, and psychologically implant into the electorate that remain was a done deal.
Too bad the grannies of Sunderland weren’t listening
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.