If we vote for Brexit what happens

Rinoa

kabayiri wrote: »

Btw, I am working on the definitive Brexit pop song using the now well established technique of plagiarism and quality reduction that is synonymous with today's pop output.

In the interests of (a little) suspense I won't reveal the source. You can guess

:--
'Crats (a) foot,
Kitten Heeled Paw,
Euro politicians scream Delors,
Juncker leaves dinner with a point to score,
Twenty first Century Brexit Man.

I only know the oldies

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIIozp8GqAM

gfplux

The_Last_Username wrote: »

Tell us when it happens.
They've been on about this possibility for years.
Also note one very important word: "may".

"May" move, as in might perhaps possibly.

The Evening Standard are now confirming the move. The "May" has gone out of the window.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/jp-morgan-confirms-plan-to-move-hundreds-of-jobs-out-of-london-because-of-brexit-a3529601.html

"Banking giant JP Morgan has confirmed hundreds of jobs will be moved out of London because of Brexit.

Daniel Pinto, head of JP Morgan's corporate and investment bank, has revealed a "substantial portion of the business" in the capital will be moved in a bid to secure the banking giant’s EU business."

The word to note is "confirmed" the last line of the article is

"A spokesman for JP Morgan confirmed the plans to the Standard."

Tromking

gfplux wrote: »

It is well worth the read, 10 minutes or less, of course both sides of the argument here can take what they want from it.
However do remember this daily newspaper print and online is quite a heavy weight in German Media with the 2nd largest circulation. In Wikipedia they claim to deliver hard copies to 148 Country's every day. It has an interesting independent ownership.
Britain is not making friends in Germany at the moment.

Thank you for the effort in posting this, but most of us got the gist of this 4/5 days ago.
I heard a journalist from FAZ being interviewed on 5live earlier in the week and he as you would expect just trumpeted the German/EU commission standpoint, there was no real evidence of an "interesting independent ownership" I fear.
It's good to hear the UK is allegedly preparing for a no deal, two years of this continuing Germanic bullcrap would be unbearable.

Thrugelmir

Herzlos wrote: »

I've not heard of any investment or new opportunities or anything that's a direct or indirect result of Brexit, and can't be waved away by "that could have happened anyway". But I have heard of plenty of losses that are being attributed directly to Brexit.

Have you just arrived from Mars? Or simply applying selective thinking. The challenges the UK faces are nothing new. For example, wasn't so long ago that no one cared less about overpaid bankers losing their jobs in their thousands. Banks are still undergoing structural reform. A lot of the changes would have occurred without Brexit.

Did you know that 300 new restaurants opened in Manchester alone in 2016? How secure are those jobs and businesses once the squeeze on consumer spending really bites.

Internet and technology are both going to have major impacts in the future. Simply sitting and hoping is not an option.

Ballard

gfplux wrote: »

The Evening Standard are now confirming the move. The "May" has gone out of the window.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/jp-morgan-confirms-plan-to-move-hundreds-of-jobs-out-of-london-because-of-brexit-a3529601.html

"Banking giant JP Morgan has confirmed hundreds of jobs will be moved out of London because of Brexit.

Daniel Pinto, head of JP Morgan's corporate and investment bank, has revealed a "substantial portion of the business" in the capital will be moved in a bid to secure the banking giant’s EU business."

The word to note is "confirmed" the last line of the article is

"A spokesman for JP Morgan confirmed the plans to the Standard."

We can only hope that this isn't the start of a larger exodus but I fear that there's a lot more to come.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

gfplux wrote: »

The Evening Standard are now confirming the move. The "May" has gone out of the window.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/jp-morgan-confirms-plan-to-move-hundreds-of-jobs-out-of-london-because-of-brexit-a3529601.html

"Banking giant JP Morgan has confirmed hundreds of jobs will be moved out of London because of Brexit.

Daniel Pinto, head of JP Morgan's corporate and investment bank, has revealed a "substantial portion of the business" in the capital will be moved in a bid to secure the banking giant’s EU business."

The word to note is "confirmed" the last line of the article is

"A spokesman for JP Morgan confirmed the plans to the Standard."

(Text removed by MSE Forum Team)

And not just that his tactics didn't work either.

“We will have to move hundreds of people in the short term to be ready for day one, when negotiations finish, and then we will look at the longer-term numbers.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-05-03/jpmorgan-to-move-hundreds-of-staff-to-three-eu-offices-on-brexit

A shift in banking jobs from Britain to continental Europe because of Brexit is likely be in the "low thousands", the City of London's new policy chief said on Thursday

http://uk.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-city-idUKKBN180271

Now, do you know how many are employed in "financial and related professional services" in London?
Over 700,000 in 2014.
Specifically in banking?
Over 140,000 in 2014. *1

So whilst a few thousand lost will not be nice exactly, it certainly won't be fatal.
Sorry to shatter your delusions.
Oh, and the news that Luxembourg won't be offering financial sweeteners must be difficult for you too.
But of course they couldn't - the EU makes that illegal. *2

Again though, none of this has happened yet.
Plans or no plans.
None of it has actually happened.

When it has - and when we see the consequences - THEN you may feel free to gloat.
Or free to feel extremely foolish, depending upon the outcome.
Until then, uh-uh.
No.
You're just peddling propaganda.

*1 http://news.efinancialcareers.com/uk-en/187686/number-people-employed-londons-financial-sector-now-exceeds-2007/

*2 http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-europe-banks-brexit-idUKKBN18026D

kabayiri

Thrugelmir wrote: »

...
Did you know that 300 new restaurants opened in Manchester alone in 2016? How secure are those jobs and businesses once the squeeze on consumer spending really bites.
...

In some places around Manchester you can :-
- get fed
- get your hair done
- get your nails done
- place your bets
- get rat faced

...all without using so much as 10% charge on your motability scooter

Ballard

One bank out of scores of large banks in the city have said that hundreds of jobs will leave. There's every chance that most of the other large banks will now follow suit as they can act like sheep. I don't see this as something to dismiss lightly but Jock seems to think it largely unimportant. I am not surprised in the least.

gfplux

Tromking wrote: »

Thank you for the effort in posting this, but most of us got the gist of this 4/5 days ago.
I heard a journalist from FAZ being interviewed on 5live earlier in the week and he as you would expect just trumpeted the German/EU commission standpoint, there was no real evidence of an "interesting independent ownership" I fear.
It's good to hear the UK is allegedly preparing for a no deal, two years of this continuing Germanic bullcrap would be unbearable.

Your thanks excepted graciously.
It is important in the fog of war that we all can read source material.
The Times weekly email contains the following analysis of the meeting and its fall out. All good to read.

"By now we have seen the fallout from Theresa May and Jean-Claude Juncker's dinner from hell. It is worth reading in full the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung's account of what happened — quite clearly briefed to the journalist by Mr Juncker or his all-powerful chief of staff, Martin Selmayr. Here are seven things it tells us:

1) Theresa May's change of tone had worked… until now. We wrote at the time that one of the most striking features of the prime minister's Article 50 letter and the speech she made in the Commons to accompany it was the new emollience. She praised Europe's "liberal democratic values" and repeatedly called for close cooperation. The article says that this gave Brussels "reason for hope" that Mrs May would "now show herself from a new side — pragmatic and willing to compromise".

2) Jean-Claude Juncker plans to talk tough. That hope was extinguished at the dinner and, according to the newspaper, Mr Juncker told Mrs May as much. The Commission president, we're told, "saw two options: either remain silent and thereby possibly support May's illusions, or hit back at her. He decided for the latter." This is some clue as to how Mr Juncker sees himself. Mr Juncker has always been more explosive and unpredictable and less diplomatic than his European Council counterpart, Donald Tusk. He seems to be conceiving of his role as the Brussels truth-teller to Mrs May's starry-eyed Brexit optimism.

3) Securing a deal on citizens' rights will take time. We have written before of the many complex stumbling blocks in the way of a quick deal guaranteeing the rights of European citizens in the UK and British expats in the EU27. They include thorny and technical questions around pensions and healthcare. Mrs May suggested at the dinner that the issue could be resolved at a summit as early as two weeks after the election. Brussels disagrees. It doesn't much matter that the PM thinks that it should be easy. The EU wants to thrash out all the issues before resolving the question. So that is the only option available, and it will take time

4) Britain wants four days of negotiations each month. The article does tell us something new about the actual mechanics of the talks. Mrs May apparently wants "monthly negotiation blocks taking place over four days in Brussels, prepared with position papers." The article does not suggest that Mr Juncker or Michel Barnier rejected that idea, although it does describe the ideas as "unconventional". There is still the slightly vexed question of who will be on the British side of the table opposite Mr Barnier.

5) Mrs May has not reconciled herself to leaks. As home secretary, Mrs May was known for her secrecy and her submarine tendencies. She does not like leaks because she does not understand why other politicians commit them. At the dinner she apparently demanded that "everything should stay secret until a conclusion is reached". This is simply not practical, as the leak of the dinner itself showed.

6) David Davis is still a loose cannon. In 2008, David Davis resigned as MP and shadow home secretary to force a by-election on civil liberties. It delayed the beginning of his cabinet career by almost a decade and was an insight into the eccentricities that perhaps barred him from ever becoming Tory leader. At the dinner, Mr Davis boasted three times of how he sued Mrs May at the European Court of Justice when she was home secretary over data retention. Another prime minister might have taken the joke well. Mrs May, we are told, did not. Does she trust Mr Davis to stay on message when the negotiations begin in earnest? The government reshuffle after the election may be more extensive than people think, and we will find out then.

7) Mr Juncker has his own audience, too. The German newspaper article is excellent journalism — you can measure that just by its impact. But it is also a study in credulity. This is the one-sided story of someone who, to put it lightly, has a decent amount of skin in the game. The subtext is of an all-powerful Jean-Claude Juncker: he who has to point out the difficulties to Mrs May; he who calls up Angela Merkel to warn her of disasters. But it will be Mr Barnier at the table, and it will be Donald Tusk who has to square the eventual deal with the member states."

gfplux

Those on this thread who are interested in immigration for either more, better quality or less, the following from the Times Brexit weekly email should at least wonder about the consequences.

---

"Finishing free movement
We know that the government has made a political decision to end free movement of people after Brexit but is the civil service capable of delivering on that? No, says a leading Whitehall think tank.

The Institute for Government said that the scale of the "administrative challenge" in delivering a new immigration regime by early 2019 was "unfeasible" for the government, employers, landlords and public services providers.

A report, Implementing Brexit: Immigration, says that even the existing process for granting EU nationals permanent residency in the UK is not fit for purpose and that the Home Office could require as many as 5,000 more staff to process applications from longstanding residents who want to stay after Brexit.

The report urged the government to "recognise now" that a post-Brexit immigration system will not be operable as soon as the process of leaving the bloc is complete. If it does not do so, the report said, implementation of a new system is "likely to be several years post-Brexit". "

---

Perhaps we will not see too many Barista visa's