Maybe in the 8 years the North and other 'provinces' have been sitting tight they've discovered a love of the Dada art movement - For something new to be created first everything must be destroyed.

So their decision to not spend ( for no real reason other than somebody has said so ) is now already causing chaos again because somebody has said so , shows how fragile our economy is


It all just becomes self serving , and that quite often is just fear

No. Just to be clear, I'm not being insulting, or sneery, or anything else. I'm just describing what is actually happening, right now. While it's true that in some cases, one can "talk down" a single share on the stock market - particularly with an inaccurate rumour, it just isn't the case that one can "talk down" the entire stock market. The algorithms which do most of the trading are impervious to emotion. When the market crashes like this, it's because hundreds of billions of pounds of globally mobile capital is fleeing (or shorting) stocks. You can't "talk down" an economy, because while individual private investors are prone to irrational emotions, the sort of institutions which are behind capital movement of this size, are not. Yes, there's a group mentality, and yes they will seek to follow a trend. But we've had too much denial in the last week. This is real, it's happening. We are having the single biggest financial crash of modern times, and it is directly caused not by a few people moaning about the decision. It's caused [iby [/ithe decision.

We're on the second day. We haven't invoked Article 50 yet. I cannot emphasise enough how bad this is. It's already worse than 2008. The rest of the world thinks we're utterly mad to take this decision, and that our economy is going to shrink, rapidly. They - and our own funds and wealthy investors - are taking their money out, and that makes it, to a certain extent, an even more self-fulfilling philosophy. You might not like that. It might not be what that liar Johnson said would happen. But it's what all the experts predicted, and it is exactly what is happening. It's going to keep happening until either we hit a bottom when that money thinks it's arrived at the new level of the British economy, or when someone puts their brain back in at Westminster and finds a way to stop us all from cutting our own throats.

If you've got savings, I'd advise converting them into dollars and sitting on them for a few weeks. You've already lost a lot of value on them, but there's almost certainly more to come.

But when you have our PM 12 months ago saying ( when he thought his opinion was a shoe in ) we would be fine outside the EU , then when seeing he might lose predicting Armageddon , who has sown the seeds of fear ?

I notice George changed his tune this morning when asked about his budget

Getting away from the economics of the decision today we saw the real EU , the German Chancellor with her 2 lap dogs , we've never really been a genuine member of the EU club , opting out of fundamental parts of its ideals , so the choice actually was

Do we pull out now ? , or jump in with both feet no longer being the awkward member of the family ?

That wasn't even slightly the choice.

[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36641390Leave campaign lies withdrawn so far[/url

Backwards mentality of Leave voters exposed:

Then they are educated, (but given what I have read as an observer over the years, most of your posts are rubbish and lies), but they voted in a way to screw up their own futures...

It's convenient to 'get away' from the economics of the decision isn't it? In the same way that it's convenient to get away from the £350 million quid a week for the NHS, or the end of free movement; because they are inconvenient truths, or more appropriately in the latter two examples, untruths. As Roy Heggarty has pointed out in great detail however, there is no getting away from the economics of the decision - it's a total disaster for our economy, the depth of which has nowhere near been revealed in the few days since the referendum. The market is only just starting to react - it's going to get significantly worse and last for a long time, unless some wonk at Westminster can come up with a way to get us out of this insane situation.

In your opinion.

Its started already. https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... are_btn_tw

Its started already. https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... are_btn_tw

Reality not part of your scene then?

What is happening is only a figment of someones imagination?

You'll be saying next that Carlsberg is proper beer and that a big Mac meal is a gourmets delight! Actually you may not but there so many who will think that and I could hazard an educated guess how they voted!

which country will be the next to leave this failing europe then?

A little improvement today , obviously not to Thursdays inflated levels , but considering the current turmoil not too bad up to now IMO

[list[/list:u

what is happening any sane man knew would do, that there would be negative reactions in the markets and elsewhere however comments that it will get significantly worse are yet to be proven, hence it is only an opinion and not certain to happen. I have no problem with that opinion, it may be proven correct in time, we will see but nobody really knows for sure and that is the only fact here.

your attempt at humour and belittling those who have a different opinion to yourself is in line with almost every other poster on these boards i have encountered so far since the result didn't go the way you wanted, too bad.

I notice you chose to avoid my actual point , essentially we are leaving the German European Union , there might be 27 members other than us , but like us , they don't make the rules

We've got companies who've lost 30-40% of their pre-vote value on Thursday, who've today regathered 8% [ifrom that new low[/i. This is quite probably what's known in the trade as a Dead Cat Bounce. The clever trading institutions stop selling for a bit - even buy a little - to stabilise the price. The less clever institutions (and the private investors) are fooled into thinking it's the bottom, and so they jump in for a rise, only to be left high and dry on the spike as the big guys start selling again.

Nothing goes down (or up) in a straight line. We've had the initial shock which accounted for the record-breaking movements. While nothing concrete happens (or the complete political chaos we currently have obscures anything), the markets will dash this way and that, like a flock of starlings. If it looks like a down day, the algos will jump on that and exaggerate it, and ditto if the day looks positive. Occasionally events such as announcements from Merkel, or downgrades by the credit agencies will send a bigger shock and bigger movements. But in the meantime, monitor the trend, and remember that a 10% loss is bigger than a 10% gain. It's far too early to see the trend, because we're only 3 days in now. But it'll be down - guaranteed.

It's also worth bearing in mind that whenever there is news or a solid hint that there might be a way of reversing this mess (what Johnson says will now be something watched very carefully by the markets - astonishingly), the markets will rise. Whenever it seems likely that we really are planning to drive off the cliff, they'll fall. That on its own should tell us what the impact of this will be for our economy in the short, medium and long-term. International money is attracted to safety and growth potential, and flees insecurity and negative growth. The view of international cash is unanimous - Brexit is a disaster.

That's unfortunately not true, as we'll find out. When we're begging for scraps from the door in terms of trade agreements, the individual countries will each get a say in what we're allowed. So the Germans are clearly going after our financial services market. The Eastern Europeans will veto any deal which doesn't guarantee free movement of Labour and citizenship rights for those who are already here. The Spanish will insist on the same or greater share of fishing in British waters. The French will slap on barriers to British agriculture. Everyone inside the room will have their own specific local industry which is in direct competition with a British firm, and they'll all want specific advantages. In the past, we've been able to veto those advantages, but now, of course, we won't. We'll have to take what we're given.

Reading your post there gives more an indication of the financial games our nice people ' in the city ' play to make their millions , you wonder if they give a stuff about any potential damage they do

Similarily you wonder if your estate agent friends aren't just ' declaring ' difficulties to stimulate selling , as lets face it , that's how they make money

Question to all Remainer's

1. Do you genuinely believe the EU is democratic?

If yes, how so?

If no, why the hell do you support it?

No, they don't give a stuff at all. Financial services is turbocharged capitalism. They exist solely to make as much money as possible, and as they showed in the run-up to 2008, they're quite happy to cheat and lie in order to get that cash. However, at the moment, they're making that cash in this country, and paying a fairly large amount of tax on it while the workers in the system spend their silly salaries on stuff which the rest of us provide. The firms will happily move to another country if there's an advantage, and will either take those workers with them, or simply recruit another bunch in their new home.

Capitalism doesn't give a stuff about nationalism. The only way to try and put limits on that sort of behaviour is to work across national boundaries - essentially sign up to an agreement not to beggar-thy-neighbour. You might call such a club the European Union. Which we just left.

I assume they make money from in simple terms ' ups and downs ' so why move to boring Germany with stability ?

But still you accept that they use and in fact create their own instability to make cash , and much of that instability was a result of outlandish claims of doom ( pre referendum but not 12 months ago or now ) by mr,s Cameron and Osbourne ?

It's not comparable. For example, elements of the UK government are far more undemocratic than anything in the EU. There are no hereditary positions of power in the EU, whereas we have a head of state who has to be born between the right legs, and a House of Lords which still contains 100 guys who are there solely because their distant ancestor was handy with a sword.

Yes there are appointed officials in the EU, but there are appointed officials in all administrations (eg the entire US Cabinet is appointed, not elected), including ours - the rest of the House of Lords is appointed, as are all judges, all ambassadors, all bosses of quangos and agencies. We don't get to elect any of the men and women who run our government. We vote for MPs, and if those MPs form a majority their leader (who only 1/600th of us get to vote for) appoints the rest. In doing so, he has total authority, as in this country, the executive is all powerful and the legislature has very little checking power. So you could argue that the EU is actually rather more accountable because the process of appointing its officials is a matter of endless horse-trading between different Governments, providing a certain degree of check and balance.

Similarly, the EU electoral system is certainly more democratic than ours, because it's proportional. Which is why, ironically, UKIP have just 1 MP in this country despite 4m votes in 2015, whereas they have lots of MEPs.

Finally, it's not a government. I know the right-wing press have banged on about federalism and supranational states, bu the bottom line is that that was always just silly propaganda. The EU is a collection of nation states who choose to abide by decisions which they make collectively, because they believe that the benefits of the decisions which work for them outweigh the negatives of the decisions which work against them. It's not a government, it's a club. On any issues of great importance (eg expansion), each state retains a veto. On lesser issues (eg minimum product specifications), they accept majority decision-making. They don't lose sovereignty, they loan it willingly. And if in any doubt about that, note that when 52% of us decided to pull out, nobody in the EU said "you can't". We always had sovereignty. Our government was always in ultimate charge. We were choosing to co-operate, not being ordered to do so.

So you're asking whether I thought what was essentially a voluntary economic club is more democratic than a nation-state. Two very different things, but even then, the economic club was almost certainly more democratic, institutionally.

It depends. Some light-fingered institutions like a little instability (within reason), because they make their skim on the ups and downs. But there are other institutions who like stability more than anything else. Which is why at tims of great crisis, like now, you find that money floods into government bonds which actually pay negative returns, because those institutions would rather know they're going to lose 1% a year on their capital, than risk losing much more.

So generally the market likes a little up and down within certain boundaries. This is way outside that.