Member Info for Genghis15

think = that link

dunderhead

Correct re video, and, I'm sorry to say, re DM!

I agree with some of what you both say about London opinion ; certainly our political elite lost touch with the people and much of the leave vote was motivated by that.

But to return to economics, I'm afraid the overwhelming evidence is that those communities outside London that largely voted for Brexit will be the ones most heavily impacted by its consequences. Goodbye Nissan, Airbus, etc.

I don't know why you think "shit will….hit the fan" if Brexit is stopped.

It was mandated by a referendum and all politicians agree that it can only be reversed by a second.

If that were to happen (unlikely imho), then the "will of the people" would have changed, and should be accepted.

Fwiw, my personal opinion is that there will be no 2nd vote ; but if there is, it is quite likely that Leave could win again.

There you go, you've dragged me into politics now.

I look at macro view but not sure think too relevant.
Talks about ibdicesbut all I'm worried about is O&G and that does not behave the same as the broader index, at least not often.

"Why does that berk think people were fighting"

There is no need for insults, and I was trying to avoid all politics until WW2 was thrown at me.

What I am trying to point out is that all the economic nonsense in the video are wrong, and can be shown to be wrong by any first year economics student.

If you want to leave for political reasons, that's up to you.

But the economics do not stack up, and if you think they do then I'm afraid you have seriously misled yourself, with help from the Daily Mail and JRM.

This is almost 2019.
Y r u harking back to WW2?

I am deliberate avoiding the politics; undoubtedly we will disagree.

Economics is different.

The electorate was st a pup on the premise of saving 350m quid a week and being better off.

Trust the IMF? Yes, in most matters. They are the international body thyat stands behind the entire global capitalist system, without which we are alI in trouble.
Company heads? I trust them to act in their own best interests, which is what all companies and institutions do.

As a country it means we have to create an environment where their interests lead them to act in ways advantageous to the UK.

They, and many others, from the City to the car industry, from aerospace to pharma, are pointing out that Brexit will lead to the opposite. They should really not need to ; the simplest understanding of economics tells you that exiting a single market/customs union with your largest, and geographically closest (it matters) trading partners, will lead to damage.

If you disregard those views because they are at odds with your own, you are allowing prejudice to lead you to cognitive bias.

It is just that I find it al most always best to listen to those better qualified or experienced than I, whether it be in plumbing, economics or nuclear fission.

We can all pick holes with hindsight and experts don't see everything coming, whether it be Fukushima , Northern Rock, or a boiler malfunction. But if you want the best guide to consequences of any action, I have always found it best to listen to experts in the field.

How so many people (not only here) with no relevant experience or training can think they know better than the IMF or the heads of JLR, Goldmans, RR, etc, etc, is a real triumph of magical thinking.

May I politely enquire if anyone here holds any sort of economics qualification ?

If they operate here, pay taxes here, employ workers here, they are contributing to the UK economy.

The man on the shop floor at JLR or BMW will be taking a wage home, just as if he worked for RR.

The man at 23 minutes is talking cobblers ; we have better trade deals with RoW now as EU members than we can possibly get on our own.

Why do you guys rely on unknown audience members and commentators for your opinions? Do you just look for confirmation of your views?

What makes anyone think that they know better than professional economists, when they wouldn't dream of similarly rubbishing, say, cardiologists or pilots? Deny the views of indudtrialists, when it is those same industrialists who mwill decide where to site their new factories?

I listen to people who matter. And they are all saying clearly that Brexit is an economic act of deliberate self harm.

I have not commented on the politiocs of this, and will endeavour not to ; whatever anyone's views on that is up to them.
But anyone thinking they know better than the consensus of industry, banking, commerce, and finance about the economic consequences is fooling themselves.

the BBC clearly took an editorial decision post ref that that was the new status quo, and have under reported Remain issues ever since, as well as platforming many more Leavers than Remainers, and failing to question dubious, even outright false, assertions. Left or rigt wing is not relevant to that given Corbyn's stance, or lack of one.

The CBI represents BRITISH industry, the clue is in the name. The 190,000 members run the factories, workshops, warehouses, etc, that provide employment for 7 million people in the UK. I think that's about as British as you could wish for.

I know we are all whistling in the wind when it comes to SP predictions, and in any case much depends on Poo.

But if Poo behaves, this must surely rise strongly in the next few weeks.

Project wise the boat is nearly there ; tho we do not know why it is headed to Aberdeen instead of Lerwick or Lancaster ; crew pickup perhaps?

Anyway, barring any further port delays there's a good chance of an early hookup and FOIL by February.

Add to that the start of a new quarter, and a new calendar year, when instis often rebalance their portfolio. That could see money coming in here, given the milestones passed and about to be passed.

So with the Poo caveat, I'm expecting a doubling over the next 3 months.

Fingers crossed for PoO, tho.

The BBC has been pro Brexit since the vote, editorial decision to treat it as a done deal. Only C4 has sensible coverage of the issues and of the shift in public attitude as a result.

If you think the CBI, SMMT, OECD, IMF, World Bank, BoE, EEF, BBA, are all talking drivel that's up to you.

But that is not a sane and rational analysis.

Rudey
Whether or not you like the £9m funding it broke no laws. Leave did, and its backers have consistently hidden where funds came from, ; most likely from Russia, of course.

"what happened to the punishment budget"
The new Chancellor borrowed instead. we will all pay for that in the end. The £ fell 18%+, and we are all paying for the inflation that caused. GDp is lower than it would otherwise have been, , tho hard to ay by how much. What is certain is that from being the fastest growing economy in the EU we are now the slowest.

You can rubbish the experts all you like, but the telling point is that every investment bank employs an economist and takes their advice seriously. All of them expect Brexit to seriously damage the UK economy.

Whatever your politics, to deny and/or ignore that is foolish. To further rubbish conservative forecasts prepared by the Civil Service which is universally regarded as one of, if not the, best and most professional in the world, is to undermine constitutional integrity.

If, dunderhead, you want to leave regardless of the economic costs, fine, tho imho that justifies your handle.

But to deny those costs is either foolish or pigheaded, and will be shown to be wrong to all of our costs.

I should add that I will never start OT such as this, but if others wish to post Brexit drivel on here I will challenge it. Myths prosper otherwise.

Tho mb one day, CD?

That video is doing the rounds on FB.

High on opinion, low on any knowledge of economics or international trade.

I've rarely seen such drivel, a first year economics student could demolish it in a trice.

But then, Brexit was never about facts. The lie on the bus, the electoral law breaking, the rubbishing of experts, it has always been about appealing to people's emotions and burying the truth.

bnb
I won't miss Dierich or Carnegie.

Ricfle was intensely irritating at times and often seemed to lack any social skill, thjo tbf social media can make us all seem that way at times.

But as BNB says, he did a lot of research, posted mostly factually, and I for one never argued with him without a careful fact check.

i too will be sorry if he's vanished for good.

What we need to know is, is she still sailing tomorrow?

IJWT
Except that at low Poo assets in the ground tend not to move the SP, and certainly don't reflect in it at $5 per barrel.

jpwh
i'm not sure anyone can say ; for sure the forward markets, hedging, etc, accentuates volatility.

If OPEC+ cuts get real, and the world economy starts looking a bit more robust, things could turn pretty fast.

In short....nobody knows, least of all me.

I should add that your significant observation is that HUR have no debt, barring CBs.

Agree it is the highly indebted companies such as the ones you mention that are in trouble at low PoO, and whose s/holders are most at risk.