Brexit, The Economy and House Prices (Part 2)

Rusty_Shackleton

Similarly i said nothing about restricting press freedoms, just that to own a British newspaper you should be resident and pay taxes here. For example, what in suggesting wouldnt stock Paul Dacre from buying the Daily Mail from Rothermere (non dom) if I had my way, would it? Im sure you can imagine how I feel about Dacre. If you disagree with my view then please do argue your side of it, but dont twist my words and outright lie about what ive said.

Herzlos

Private_Church wrote: »

So the fall in the value of Sterling (down to 2011 value) is down to Brexit?.. Talk about grasping at straws. Sterling was always going to find its true value after being over valued for years through HPI and QE and you know that full well.

So it's a wild coincidence it dropped the same morning the result was announced? Why would it happen then if it's always been overpriced?

Thrugelmir

Herzlos wrote: »

So it's a wild coincidence it dropped the same morning the result was announced? Why would it happen then if it's always been overpriced?

Markets require triggers. Akin to buffalo. Only takes a few heading for the exits for a stampede to develop. As "Crashes" don't require huge numbers to change their perspective. Then automated trading kicks in.

Google overvalued Sterling. The facts are out there in black and white.

Until it's news , people aren't interested in what's really going on. As it doesn't impact them. Then look shocked and bewildered when the obvious comes true. Of course no one can predict precisely when.

Rusty_Shackleton

Im sorry, are you seriously suggesting that, given the well aored opinion of economists, banks and corporations about the likely economic impact of brexit, that the vote had nothing to do with the decreasing valiue of sterling? Youre saying it was purely a trigger to kick people into action over its overvalue?

Also wheres this '2011 value' idea come from? Sterling hasn't been near parity eoth the Euro before has it?! Genuinely asking, never seen it before but havent checked

Private_Church

Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »

Also wheres this '2011 value' idea come from? Sterling hasn't been near parity eoth the Euro before has it?! Genuinely asking, never seen it before but havent checked

Back in May 2011 Sterling was valued at €1.12. What is it today ?.

My point is remoaners on here claim that Sterling has tanked which it clearly hasn't otherwise those same Remoaners would have been spouting the same rubbish back in 2011 and they weren't.

http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=EUR&view=10Y

Rusty_Shackleton

As I said, i was genuinely asking

Looking at a graph of the exchange rate in 2011, it looks like that kind of value was very shortlived, perhaps a month (the graph in looking at isn't very detailed) . Do you know how the rate over the past year compares to historic trends when sterling dipped this low?

Tromking

Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »

Do you personally believe the EU should have done anything? Cameron could easily have come back telling everyone what a great compromise he'd forced the evil EU into... that anyone without a job after 3 months would be sent back. He could have claimed success against any of the 'evils' the right wing press have been conjuring up for decades, correcting their falsehoods and taking credit for it as a change made possible thanks to him.

But he didnt. He wouldn't call the bluff of the daily mail - honestly, what would they have done? Tell the uneducated masses that in fact Cameron is the latest of successive UK governments to use the EU as a scapegoat for their own unpopular choices? And risk handing Corbyn, who's had no strong association with any past administration, the keys to number 10? Dont be daft!

Enough with the "don't be daft" rhetoric, like you and others I just come on here and proffer my personal take on things.
You are right in one thing, the EU and its constituent nations were under no obligation to make things easier at home politically for Cameron.That said, lest we forget the alleged anger from Frau Merkel at Juncker and Tusk for the politically calamitous loss of an important nation like the UK from the EU family. Brexit was a Europe-wide political failure.

Private_Church

Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »

As I said, i was genuinely asking

Looking at a graph of the exchange rate in 2011, it looks like that kind of value was very shortlived, perhaps a month (the graph in looking at isn't very detailed) . Do you know how the rate over the past year compares to historic trends when sterling dipped this low?

No Idea and I'm not really sure trends can be used to support any arguement with regards to Brexit because its never happend before.

Its all very well people looking at Sterling and its current near parity with the Euro but we also need to look at what is happening with the Euro and the huge issues the Euro faces in the near future so my question would be will the Euro maintain its strength against the £ given the Banking crisis in Italy,Debt crisis in Greece etc etc.

mrginge

Rusty_Shackleton wrote: »

No Mrginge, im talking about banning foreign interests from owning newspapers, not the quite the same as banning any individuals from coming here is it? Im quite happy for Murdoch to emigrate here, and if he resides here and pays taxes, id be happy for him to own newspapers here too. Until he has a vested interest in the success and wellbeing of this country and its people, i dont think he should be allowed to stoke hatred in order to make a quick buck from abroad.

When you say 'stoke hatred' do you mean 'print things that you don't agree with?'

As far as I'm aware we have a fairly advanced legal framework in this country, which mean that if anyone starts 'stoking hatred' they can be prosecuted. Equally you as an individual can raise complaints about newspaper articles quite easily and have that complaint independently assessed.

GreatApe

Migrants add to the supply of labor (if they work) but the very same migrants add to the demand of goods and services.

If a migrant came to the UK and pitched a tent in a park and ate nothing but bread and drank nothing but water and bought absolutely nothing no phone no TV no toilet paper no anything then its true they would be suppressing wages as all they would be doing is adding to supply of labor.

But that's not the reality for most migrants. For instance I know a recent ish migrant family been here about 5 years. The husband works in construction and the wife looks after the 4 year old and 1 year old baby. So while the husband is adding to the supply of labor the family is adding to the demand of goods and services. Everything from mobile phones to eating out to buying thing they and their kids need to healthcare and soon for education etc etc

As a guess I would say on average migrants more or less just about cover their own consumption. That is to say they produce 100 units of labor and consume 100 units of goods and services.

Actually that probably isn't true its possibly more like 100 units produced 95 units consumed as the public has a positive savings rate. Perhaps migrants are more like 100 units produced 90 consumed primarily due to the better demographics of migrants.


Overall I would be very pro for migrants in the 20s and very anti for migrants in their 50s+