PM speech on Tuesday - Pound down 5% on Monday?

Alan_Brown

Graham_Devon wrote: »

It's a good speech so far.

I'm glad she's tapped into how "punishing Britain" will also punish all other EU nations, so it's in the best interests of everyone to deal with this properly, instead of dealing with is based on punishment.

Pounds rallying (so far!)

The EU needs to remember that it is a political union, not a religious cult that punishes and shuns members who leave. The EU needs to encourage member states to stay by making the union work for them and for it to be successful, rather than using threats and punishments.

TrickyTree83

Filo25 wrote: »

There's a few porkies in there but generally a decent speech I agree, and really the only negotiating position she can set out at present in the current political environment, at least its sounding more conciliatory towards the EU than Trump managed to, while setting out clear priorities.

What did you think were porkies then?

Filo25

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

What did you think were porkies then?

Still no real evidence of significant wage suppression as a result of immigration, although it is quoted in the speech.

Britain won't seek a Half in Half out deal, while wanting to be half in and half out of the customs union.

Not a porky as such, but Britain (with Theresa May herself as Home Sec) had full control of non EU immigration and had no success at all in reducing it, in spite of talking tough on the matter. It gets a bit boring listening to EU membership getting the blame for high immigration when the government had no success in reducing the amount of immigration that it did have control over. If we had zero immigration from the EU we would still have missed the "tens of thousands" target.

mayonnaise

Good speech.
The brexiteer nutjobs will have nowhere to hide now. No excuses.

TrickyTree83

Filo25 wrote: »

Still no real evidence of significant wage suppression as a result of immigration, although it is quoted in the speech.

Britain won't seek a Half in Half out deal, while wanting to be half in and half out of the customs union.

Not a porky as such, but Britain (with Theresa May herself as Home Sec) had full control of non EU immigration and had no success at all in reducing it, in spite of talking tough on the matter. It gets a bit boring listening to EU membership getting the blame for high immigration when the government had no success in reducing the amount of immigration that it did have control over. If we had zero immigration from the EU we would still have missed the "tens of thousands" target.

Being in the position of having a non-EU spouse and looking through all the possible visa's when we applied for hers, it doesn't surprise me that due to the ECHR it's quite difficult/impossible to put a cap on the numbers of non-EU migration.

Half in half out of the customs union is not half in or half out of the EU though, as evident by Turkey.

Wage suppression has been supported by organisations such as migration watch, admittedly they could (probably are) bias, but it's not logical gymnastics to see that if the supply of the workforce is near unlimited that you have little reason to increase wages to attract workers. Especially when the labour pool includes poor countries where the minimum wage per hour is around 2 euros.

AnotherJoe

p.s. Pound up by more than half of what I forecast it would fall by, LOL.

Maybe its the "certainty" factor that counts more than what is said. eg in or out of SM, the "markets" dont care, they just want to know which.

Conrad

Parliament to get a vote. Will this satisfy the Remainers?

kabayiri

Alan_Brown wrote: »

The EU needs to remember that it is a political union, not a religious cult that punishes and shuns members who leave. The EU needs to encourage member states to stay by making the union work for them and for it to be successful, rather than using threats and punishments.

The EU does have limits on its' abilities.

If the EU state breaching their rules were Germany, the sheer size and importance of this state would limit their approach.

People may pretend that is an union of 28 equals, but it really isn't. Things like your economic size; your contribution status; even your military power; all add weight to your influence.

kabayiri

Filo25 wrote: »

...
Not a porky as such, but Britain (with Theresa May herself as Home Sec) had full control of non EU immigration and had no success at all in reducing it, in spite of talking tough on the matter. It gets a bit boring listening to EU membership getting the blame for high immigration when the government had no success in reducing the amount of immigration that it did have control over. If we had zero immigration from the EU we would still have missed the "tens of thousands" target.

Very true, but if you don't like the way the current party talks tough on numbers but fails to deliver, the electorate can punish them at the ballot box.

The by-elections in places like Stoke could illustrate this well. Labour is very pro-immigration. Will they get punished for this?

Graham_Devon

Filo25 wrote: »

Still no real evidence of significant wage suppression as a result of immigration, although it is quoted in the speech.

Theres actually quite a bit of evidence, but I accept that theres also quite a bit of evidence that states the opposite.

I personally think it's wrong to look at the impact on this in wages alone. It's also hours, security etc. I personally don't think it's any coincience that the areas using the largest amount of zero hour contracts are also the areas with the highest levels of immigration for instance.

Not a porky as such, but Britain (with Theresa May herself as Home Sec) had full control of non EU immigration and had no success at all in reducing it, in spite of talking tough on the matter. It gets a bit boring listening to EU membership getting the blame for high immigration when the government had no success in reducing the amount of immigration that it did have control over. If we had zero immigration from the EU we would still have missed the "tens of thousands" target.

That's a fair point. Not that I think it's a good enough reason to ignore EU immigration (I know thats not the point you were making).