BrExit?

[Bane_V]

Evo ga ok tekst na tu temu. http://www.vox.com/2016/6/23/12005814/brexit-eu-referendum-immigrants

 

Mislim da je antiimigrantska histerija odigrala mnogo veću ulogu u izlasku iz eu nego što bilo ko sme/želi da prizna. Već dan nakon referenduma se javljaju ljudi po društvenim mrežama i komentarima na vesti kako su doživeli neprijatnosti tipa kolega mu je rekao da pakuje kofere, gosti u restoranu pitali poljsku konobaricu zašto je srećna kad treba uskoro da se prijavljuje za vizu pa počeli da se zlurado kikoću, crnkinja čula na ulici da se neki muškarac dere kako će britanija opet biti bela itd. Izgleda da je pobeda na referendumu mnogima dala za pravo da konačno otvoreno kažu ono što godinama misle. I čini mi se da to raspoloženje nije vezano samo za UKIP, oni su samo najdirektniji.

[MancMellow]

E da. Sada se vidi sva kratkovidost Blerove odluke 2004. da ne ogranici na 7 godina priliv radne snage iz novih clanica. Osim Britanije, valjda jedino jos Svedska nije uvela ogranicenja. Odlucio Bler da bude veci evrofil od Francuza i Nemaca. I onda su se svi Poljaci i ostali koji nisu imali pristup Nemackama i Austrijama sjatili kod njih, i onda je pocela cela ta anti-imigrantska histerija, gnev zbog poljskih vodoinstalatera i slicno. Pitam se da li je to ovih dana palo Bleru na pamet i da li se sada kaje.

 

Ne verejum da se kaje. On je, sada i definitivno, poslednji britanski "imperijalni" premijer. Ideja sa neogranicavanjem je sticanje politickog uticaja i ugleda u srednjoistocnoj evropi. Blair u stvari nije laburista, on je, ne sasvim naravno, ali lepim delom, onaj stari Liberal. 

 

Dvoumi se izmedju otrova i konopca, ne može više da izdrži teret krivice...

 

Nego, ima li neko objašnjenje za plodno tle na koje je naišla antiimigrantska histerija? Ja kada sam pitao neke Britance za to, oni mi rekli da su Poljaci blago, bilo da im dolaze kao zidari, vodoinstalateri ili nešto treće - em rade 3x brže od Iraca (koji su tradicionalno pokrivali "teritoriju"), em 2x kvalitetnije, em su duplo jeftiniji. Njihov komentar je bio: "Još Poljaka!" a pošto je nezaposlenost na 5% nekako mi je čudno da su poraženi irski vodoinstalateri bili dovoljni za celu tu kampanju hejta prema imigrantima. Šta sam propustio?

 

propustio si da pricas sa zidarima i vodoinstalaterima :D 

[Muwan]

... kojih je u UK toliko mnogo i toliko su bitan društveni faktor?

[MancMellow]

... kojih je u UK toliko mnogo i toliko su bitan društveni faktor?

 

Ne naravno, to je bila polusala. Uvek treba ponavljati da nisu samo vodoinstalateri, konobari i cistacice isterali UK iz EU. Pa jbt, vecina glasaca Torijevaca je glasala za Brexit, a to je sve samo ne taj sloj. Sama ideja Brexita se rodila kod Torijevaca. Ovi (deo njih - nizih slojeva) su samo posluzili kao korisni idioti. Leva stampa malo navodi vodu na svoju vodenicu takvim pricama. Ubedljiva vecina LAB glasaca je glasala za Remain.

Edited June 26, 2016 by MancMellow

[Muwan]

OK, dakle koje je objašnjenje za torijevce tj. koji je njihov case protiv imigranata?

 

 

Edit: mislim na prosečnog Edvarda torijevca, ne na političku vrhušku.

Edited June 26, 2016 by beowl

[MancMellow]

OK, dakle koje je objašnjenje za torijevce tj. koji je njihov case protiv imigranata?

 

 

Edit: mislim na prosečnog Edvarda torijevca, ne na političku vrhušku.

 

obicnih tori glasaca ili partije? Obicnih glasaca - nacionalizam, sovereniti, imigracija je za njih korisna apstrakcija. Sto se tice partije da ponovim ovo sto je Prospero kacio

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/15/brexit-how-a-fringe-idea-took-hold-tory-party

[Lezilebovich]

Vreme je za #brenter

[Anduril]

Karsvel na BBC-u kaže da će se pozvati na Čl.50 "do kraja godine"   kaže "to je negde taj okvir", "moramo da imamo spreman tim", "moramo da to uradimo kako treba"...

 

Bice zanimljivo gledati kada mali engleski free trade nacionalisti otkriju da nacionalizam sa sobom uvek nosi i merkantilizam.

 

Tesko ce ovaj put engleski nacionalisti napraviti imperiju pa da pola sveta trguje sa njima po njihovim pravilima.

 

Ovo vec postaje pokazna vezba kako to izgleda kada evropski nacionalisti koji se super slazu dok su samo glasovi u opoziciji pocnu sa radovima.

Edited June 26, 2016 by Anduril

[aram]

... ne vidim da pise "konsenzus osim predstavnika troblemaker country"

 

by Tapatalk

nije pisalo ni u slucaju grcke...

[Ros]

Nakon današnjeg sastanka ministara spoljnih poslova zemalja osnivača EU Francuz traži novog premijera i početak pregovora za nekoliko dana uz jasnu poruku Britancima da ne igraju mačke i miša sa EU, a Nemac mu tercira:

 

 

Ni Junker nije nešto strpljiv i blagonaklon:

 

 

Merkelka je daleko pomirljivija:

 

 

Ja ne vidim razlog zbog kojeg treba da ih štede, već su imali vrlo povlašćen položaj: Britanija doprinosi budžetu EU tek nešto više od 4 puta ekonomski slabije Holandije.

 

 

net distributions kao ATP lista :D

[Anduril]

Sada cemo videti da li ce se obistiniti Soroseve prognoze:

 

 

 

The Brexit Crash Will Make All of You Poorer – Be Warned The Guardian, Jun 21, 2016 

  

David Cameron, along with the Treasury, the Bank of England, the International Monetary Fund and others have been attacked for exaggerating the economic risks of leaving the EU. This criticism has been widely accepted by the British media and many financial analysts. As a result, British voters are now grossly underestimating the true costs of Brexit.

Too many believe that a vote to leave the EU will have no effect on their personal financial position. This is wishful thinking. It would have at least one very clear and immediate effect that will touch every household: the value of the pound would decline precipitously. It would also have an immediate and dramatic impact on financial markets, investment, prices and jobs.

As opinion polls on the referendum result fluctuate, I want to offer a clear set of facts, based on my six decades of experience in financial markets, to help voters understand the very real consequences of a vote to leave the EU.

The Bank of England, the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the IMF have assessed the long-term economic consequences of Brexit. They suggest an income loss of £3,000 to £5,000 annually per-household once the British economy settles down to its new steady-state five years or so after Brexit. But there are some more immediate financial consequences that have hardly been mentioned in the referendum debate.

To start off, sterling is almost certain to fall steeply and quickly if leave wins the referendum. I would expect this devaluation to be bigger and also more disruptive than the 15% devaluation that occurred in September 1992, when I was fortunate enough to make a substantial profit for my hedge fund investors, at the expense of the Bank of England and the British government.

It is reasonable to assume, given the expectations implied by the market pricing at present, that after a Brexit vote the pound would fall by at least 15% and possibly more than 20%, from its present level of $1.46 to below $1.15 (which would be between 25% and 30% below its pre-referendum trading range of $1.50 to $1.60). If sterling fell to this level, then ironically one pound would be worth about one euro – a method of “joining the euro” that nobody in Britain would want.

Brexiters seem to recognize that a sharp devaluation would be almost inevitable after Brexit, but argue that this would be healthy, despite the big losses of purchasing power for British households. In 1992 the devaluation actually proved very helpful to the British economy, and subsequently I was even praised for my role in helping to bring it about.

But I don’t think the 1992 experience would be repeated. That devaluation was healthy because the government was relieved of its obligation to “defend” an overvalued pound with damagingly high interest rates after the breakdown of the exchange rate mechanism. This time, a large devaluation would be much less benign than in 1992, for at least three reasons.

First, the Bank of England would not cut interest rates after a Brexit devaluation (as it did in 1992 and also after the large devaluation of 2008) because interest rates are already at the lowest level compatible with the stability of British banks. That, incidentally, is another reason to worry about Brexit. For if a fall in house prices and loss of jobs causes a recession after Brexit, as is likely, there will be very little that monetary policy can do to stimulate the economy and counteract the consequent loss of demand.

Second, the UK now has a very large current account deficit much larger, relatively, than in 1992 or 2008. In fact Britain is more dependent than at any time in history on foreign capital. As the governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney said, Britain “depends on the kindness of strangers”. The devaluations of 1992 and 2008 encouraged greater capital inflows, especially into residential and commercial property, but also into manufacturing investments. But after Brexit, the capital flows would almost certainly move the other way, especially during the two-year period of uncertainty while Britain negotiates its terms of divorce with a region that has always been and presumably will remain its biggest trading and investment partner.

Third, a post-Brexit devaluation is unlikely to produce the improvement in manufacturing exports seen after 1992, because trading conditions would be too uncertain for British businesses to undertake new investments, hire more workers or otherwise add to export capacity.

For all these reasons I believe the devaluation this time would be more like the one in 1967, when Harold Wilson famously declared that “the pound in your pocket has not been devalued”, but the British people disagreed with him, quickly noticing that their true living standards were going down. Meanwhile financial speculators, back then called the Gnomes of Zurich, were making large profits at Britain’s expense. Today, there are speculative forces in the markets much bigger and more powerful. And they will be eager to exploit any miscalculations by the British government or British voters. Brexit would make some people very rich but most voters considerably poorer.

I want people to know what the consequences of leaving the EU would be before they cast their votes, rather than after. A vote to leave could see the week end with a Black Friday, and serious consequences for ordinary people.

 

 

Ova neizvesnost koju spominje a koja lako moze da se oduzi na vise od 2 godine, ce takodje pogoditi direktno Nemacku posto je UK njihov treci partner po vaznosti iza US i Francuske.

Ako i tamo krene kriza verovatnoca za unilateralne/merkantilisticke poteze od strane EU prema Britaniji ce se povecati posto ce troskovi neizvesnosti prevazici troskove pokusaja da se sa UK odigra norveski scenario.

EU (a posebno Nemacka) sledecih nedelja mora da ispita da li je norveski scenario realan - ako nije, to je to, moze poceti da se sprema sa unilateralnim odlukama i povratkom na WTO pravila u odnosu sa UK oko kljucnih industrija (finansije, automobili). 

To bi bar otklonilo neizvesnost bez obzira koliko bi potrajali pregovori o detaljima.

Edited June 26, 2016 by Anduril

[Prospero]

...

Transkript:

https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2016/06/22/transcript-professor-michael-dougan-eu-referendum/

 

Odlično je ovo.

 

Najbitnije:

 

Now that is the situation as it currently stands. What about the situation if we leave?

 

Here I have to say that the main answer is nobody has a clue. Nobody has a clue and if anybody claims that they have some detailed or precise understanding of anything that will happen really post leaving the EU then they are probably very seriously deluded.

 

...

...

Externally the biggest task will be reformulating our relations with the rest of the EU. Now we have heard a lot in the media about how we have two years to reach a new settlement with the EU, that is not actually correct at all and again for someone like me it is almost surreal to listen to the media completely given an entirely distorted view of how the world actually works.

The treaty said that you have two years within which to make your divorce settlement. But the divorce settlement is completely separate from the framework agreement for your future relations with the EU. It is completely separate legally, procedurally, institutionally.

So what we will have is a period of two years to actually reach our divorce, the actual severance of ties between the UK and the EU. The main question which will arise is, there are lots of technical questions, the main question is what do we do with the three million or so EU nationals currently living, working, studying in the UK. What do they do with the two million or so UK nationals currently living, working, studying in the rest of the EU.

That will be the main point of contention, what will be the residency rights, what will be their employment rights, their social security rights, and so on.

By contrast the agreement for future relations between the UK and the EU is a separate and distinct agreement, a separate and distinct challenge. The overwhelming consensus is that these things do not take two years to negotiate, the rough guide that we are all talking about in the field is around 10 years. Around 10 years to negotiate a comprehensive framework agreement for the future.

That is based on all previous experience of these types of agreements. In fact, most of them have taken a lot longer than that. The Swiss signed their first framework agreement with the EU back in 1972 and they are still negotiating, they have now done well over 100 bilateral treaties to deal with particular issues as they go along, it is hardly comprehensive.

[Prospero]

Brexit live: Heidi Alexander first shadow minister to resign after Hilary Benn sacking
 
Chris Ship ✔ @chrisshipitv
Labour source: @jeremycorbyn won't have a Shadow Cabinet by the end of the day. And significantly no-one to replace them. So no opposition
 
Anushka Asthana @GuardianAnushka
I suspect that people who will go include: Angela Eagle, Lucy Powell, Jonathan Ashworth, Lisa Nandy, Chris Bryant, Luciana, Gloria, Andy B.
 
Anushka Asthana @GuardianAnushka
Also - my suspicion: Charlie Falconer, Rosie Winterton, Ian Murray..

[Bojan]

OK, dakle koje je objašnjenje za torijevce tj. koji je njihov case protiv imigranata?

 

 

Edit: mislim na prosečnog Edvarda torijevca, ne na političku vrhušku.

 

Juče sam se video sa jednim prijateljem, Englezom koji živi u Bg. Čovek je konzervativac i dosta obrazovan. Glavni argument anti-imigrantske kampanje jeste taj da su pridošlice snizile cenu radne snage, što je verovatno pogodilo malo šire, a ne samo neke zanate. Britanija je u poslednjih 3 godine primila oko 900.000 imigranata.

 

Međutim, glavni momenat prilikom glasanja jeste upravo ta distanca koja postoji između elite u gradovima i običnog naroda u provinciji i manjim mestima i radnika i manje obrazovanih slojeva. Čak i nakon kampanje se održava prezir prema tim ljudima. Oni imaju svoje stavove koji možda baš nisu najbolje argumentovani, ali isto tako imaju i distancu prema eliti. Za elitu iz gradova i tu ekipu oko gardiana i indipendenta oni imaju izraz - "luvvies". Takvi Englezi su prilično arogantni i spremni su da uteraju svakome ko se postavi sa visine (što se u ovom slučaju i desilo). EU je skup nekih birokrata koji za njih nemaju nikakav legitimitet.

 

Dalje, tabloidni milje je tamo dosta rasprostranjen (što je ovde već primećeno). Sun ima tiraž od nekih 12 miliona, a dosta je čitan i Dejli ekpres (blizak UKIPu). Pomenuo mi je prijatelj i da je tamo najgledaniji neki sitkom koji se prikazuje još od 1967. godine i koji je apsolutno đubre.

 

Kada sam ga pitao u vezi ove peticije za ponavljanje referenduma on je rekao da to nema šanse da prođe, uz neki lakonski odgovor  - "to su potpisivali neki studenti iz Londona". Biće, naravno, debate oko toga.

 

Oko seljenja finansijskih usluga iz Londona on smatra da se to neće odigrati tako brzo i u nekom većem obimu, jer je London mnogo dugo jak finansijski centar i tu je sedište nekih važnih međunarodnih arbitraža za privredu.

 

Za Škote smatra da sada razumljivo dižu buku, ali kada bi došlo do glasanja odlučili bi da ostanu u UK.  

[Anduril]

Ove mladje britanske generacije su zanimljive - prvo su lenji da izadju na referendum a onda kukaju na posledice iako su masovno izostali sa referenduma.

Oni ce ovo najvise osetiti a ne penzioneri koji ce i dalje masovno glasati da im se ne smanjuju penzije kao i do sada posle krize 2008.

Veliki procenat mladih sa druge strane ceka nezaposlenost, inflacija i dugogodisnja politicka neizvesnost koju su sami izabrali svojom lenjoscu.