If we vote for Brexit what happens

The_Last_Username

Ballard wrote: »

It would be interesting to know why they didn't move the funds to London.

Eh?
You honestly don't see that the EU politicos openly saying that they will do all they can to make life as difficult as possible for the UK had anything to do with it then?

Ballard

The_Last_Username wrote: »

Eh?
You honestly don't see that the EU politicos openly saying that they will do all they can to make life as difficult as possible for the UK had anything to do with it then?

I keep reading on this very forum that the UK will be hunky dory post-Brexit so only a fool wouldn't invest in London, surely.

The_Last_Username

Ballard wrote: »

I keep reading on this very forum that the UK will be hunky dory post-Brexit so only a fool wouldn't invest in London, surely.

Whilst that may indeed be the case I cannot envisage these Nordic fund managers paying much heed to these forums, can you?

Especially so when so much of our media continues to espouse doom and gloom despite so much evidence to the contrary.

An interesting piece from the BBC's Mark Mardell here, the first paragraph being "It has been a dreadful year for the European Union. It has just got a lot worse. Next year could transform a looming existential threat into a terminal reality. The end of a joint 60-year project to transform the politics of an entire continent is now a distinct possibility"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38212049

Ballard

The_Last_Username wrote: »

Whilst that may indeed be the case I cannot envisage these Nordic fund managers paying much heed to these forums, can you?

Especially so when so much of our media continues to espouse doom and gloom despite so much evidence to the contrary.

The point that I was making, as I imagine that you're aware, was that many people on this forum are suggesting that everything will be fantastic post-Brexit but you're contradicting that by saying that receiving investment might not be quite so easy. Reading between the lines I'm guessing that you're saying that London will remain a superb place to invest but that we won't get anything from Europe because they want to be awkward.

CLAPTON

Ballard wrote: »

The point that I was making, as I imagine that you're aware, was that many people on this forum are suggesting that everything will be fantastic post-Brexit but you're contradicting that by saying that receiving investment might not be quite so easy. Reading between the lines I'm guessing that you're saying that London will remain a superb place to invest but that we won't get anything from Europe because they want to be awkward.

would Nordic fund managers obey orders from the EU bureaucratics.
would that be legal in norway?
would they not have a legal duty to maximise their returns on behalf of their 'clients'?
are you saying the Nordic fund managers are corrupt like a third world country?

CKhalvashi

gfplux wrote: »

Which is as expected.
What the extra runway at Heathrow reinforces is the attraction of the South East of England to the rest of Britain. It will only add to the overcrowding and pressure on the poor infrastructure.
If British people seek quality of life then making the rest of Britain MORE attractive and the South East of England LESS attractive is one way to go.

I'd still prefer lengthening the runway at Southend and utilising Stansted properly (which means sat 4, but no new runway now).

Stop Stansted Expansion probably feel very differently though, however it's cheaper and would have exactly the same effect (an A319 can operate from Southend, an A320/737-800 can't at present).

Just my 2p though.

Marktheshark

I said this day 1, now again.
Anyone who thinks the vote to leave the EU and the single market will be carried out is either stupid, daft or nuts.
Or all of the above.

The Common purpose runs this country and they have said NO.
They have already replaced leave the EU with this thing called "Brexit"

vivatifosi

The_Last_Username wrote: »

An interesting piece from the BBC's Mark Mardell here, the first paragraph being "It has been a dreadful year for the European Union. It has just got a lot worse. Next year could transform a looming existential threat into a terminal reality. The end of a joint 60-year project to transform the politics of an entire continent is now a distinct possibility"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38212049

Interesting article, thanks.

Apologies for not being 100% serious here, but does Geert Wilders remind anyone else of Max Zorin (Christopher Walken) from a View to a Kill?

Thrugelmir

Ballard wrote: »

The point that I was making, as I imagine that you're aware, was that many people on this forum are suggesting that everything will be fantastic post-Brexit but you're contradicting that by saying that receiving investment might not be quite so easy.

Some people aren't hung up on money when it comes to Brexit. A better quality of life. A retention of British culture. Are equally important as investment whatever that is supposed to be. After people only invest to make money. If the ownership was retained in the UK then the benefits would be more widely spread. Not channelled out of the country after paying minimal tax.

Hungary has dropped it's Corporation tax rate to 9%. Beats Eire by a clear margin. The race to the bottom continues.

Ballard

Marktheshark wrote: »

I said this day 1, now again.
Anyone who thinks the vote to leave the EU and the single market will be carried out is either stupid, daft or nuts.
Or all of the above.

The Common purpose runs this country and they have said NO.
They have already replaced leave the EU with this thing called "Brexit"

Not one single person voted to leave the single market as that was not on the ballot paper.