Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

SouthLondonUser

Not too sure what your point is.


If your point is that European banks, including UK banks, played a role in the crisis, well, yes, sure, of course, has anyone ever denied it?


If your point is that the EU has a role in the crisis while the UK doesn't or has a much smaller one, then I beg to differ. There were certainly many errors on all fronts, but it's not like the EU inflicted a crisis on the UK; if anything, the crisis exposed the limits of the light-touch regulatory approached favoured by the UK more than by other EU countries.

Herzlos

Did the EU force the Deutsche Bank to do the dodgy dealing they were fined by the US about?


Or are you just inferring that since Deutsche Bank was fined, that the EU is to blame, because it's a big German bank?

Thrugelmir

SouthLondonUser wrote: »

Not too sure what your point is.

Responding to the comment made. Nothing more nothing less.

makes you sound like you'll stop at nothing to blame the EU

Which I wasn't.

gfplux

From today’s Politico.eu email.
This will please Brexiters.............I think.
Because although I don’t know what Brexiters want I have to assume they do.

QUOTE
CABINET TARIFF ROW: Both the Sun and the Times pick up on a major Cabinet row between Philip Hammond and Michael Gove, who the papers report are fighting tariffs on food in the event of a no deal. Gove is pushing for higher tariffs to protect British farmers but Hammond and International Trade Secretary Liam Fox want lower duties to protect ordinary supermarket consumers from higher prices. “A Cabinet sub-committee on trade, chaired by the prime minister, was supposed to make a final decision on Wednesday but the row means it was taken off the agenda,” the Sun’s Matt Dathan reports. Ministers will now meet Monday to sign off on the new tariff regime if the U.K. leaves the EU without a deal on March 29, the Times’ Francis Elliot says. “They agreed two weeks ago not to impose any levies on imports to smooth trade but agreed there should be ‘limited exceptions,’ including on agriculture.”
END QUOTE

J_Nostin

Masomnia wrote: »

Of course, and you make sure you know what the expert is going to tell you before you ask them.

Yes but despite the obvious anti-Brexit bias they couldn't even quite get that right.

The lecturer said companies from Norway, which moved to Peterhead to access the single market, would likely move again

Oh dear, doesn't she realise that Norway is part of the EFTA meaning Norway already had access to the single market? So if she can't get that right you'll I'm sure forgive me if I personally don't have much faith in her predictions.

mayonnaise

gfplux wrote: »

Gove is pushing for higher tariffs to protect British farmers

Where is the brexiteer outrage over this?
I clearly remember forum brexiteers' heartfelt concern for the average African farmer, disadvantaged by EU agricultural import tariffs.

smipsy

mayonnaise wrote: »

Where is the brexiteer outrage over this?
I clearly remember forum brexiteers' heartfelt concern for the average African farmer, disadvantaged by EU agricultural import tariffs.

no outrage yet, need to put the blame on EU first

mayonnaise

Aviva, NatWest to join 'Brexodus' of business to EU

Consultancy EY has estimated that £800 billion in assets are being moved from Britain to EU hubs ahead of Brexit.

“These are not transfers that will be reversed in the event that a transition period is agreed; this is the new environment.”

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu/aviva-natwest-to-join-brexodus-of-business-to-eu-idUKKCN1Q81YW
Great job, brexiteers. :T

SouthLondonUser

You cannot reason with ideology and blind faith.

Even if it all goes horribly wrong, they will always tell us that the idea was sound, but that it was implemented poorly.

We know that part of the problem is precisely that there is no agreement on how to implement this supposedly brilliant Brexit idea, but logic won't convince them.

Rinoa

A London judge gave property developers a bit of good news in a difficult environment, ruling that the European Medicines Agency couldn't use Brexit to break its £500 million (€575 million) lease in Canary Wharf.

Judge Marcus Smith ruled in favour of the property group on Wednesday, saying that the EMA remains obligated to honour the lease. The case is one of the first in the UK to grapple with the commercial ramifications of Brexit.

The ruling "will be welcome news in the property and legal market, bringing greater certainty as to the impact of Brexit on contracts," Canary Wharf's lawyers said in a statement on Wednesday.

The EMA, which is moving its headquarters to Amsterdam, had argued that Brexit should allow it to break its 25-year lease, which has 21 years left to run. The agency pays £13 million per year to occupy more than 10 floors in the east London financial district.

Had the EMA won its case, it would have been able to cease paying rent on the office space. Such a ruling would potentially have opened the door to other organisations using Brexit to attempt to end their leases on office space in the UK.

How unfortunate.