Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Interesting. According to that, the majority of people in employment voted to remain. So that would mean peoples jobs have been potentially put at risk by people who didn't have jobs to lose. Seems a bit unfair
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/24 13:49:47
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
Allow me to make some introductions...
UK, recession. Recession, UK.
MS moving 4K+ high paying City jobs out of UK to Dublin or Frankfurt is just the beginning.
Interesting. According to that, the majority of people in employment voted to remain. So that would mean peoples jobs have been potentially put at risk by people who didn't have jobs to lose. Seems a bit unfair
Well, that is democracy. Letting people with no real stake in the state vote leads to stupid decisions. Plato already warned us for it
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/24 14:00:51
Interesting. According to that, the majority of people in employment voted to remain. So that would mean peoples jobs have been potentially put at risk by people who didn't have jobs to lose. Seems a bit unfair
Once they get rid of those damn immigrants, there'll be plenty of jobs to go around
Ex-Mantic Rules Committees: Kings of War, Warpath
"The Emperor is obviously not a dictator, he's a couch." Starbuck: "Why can't we use the starboard launch bays?"
Engineer: "Because it's a gift shop!"
I honestly can't believe that people ever trusted this guy. What utter degenerate trash this guy is.
amanita wrote: So dare I ask what happens if he farts? Could it blow the seals on the lower portion of his armor? Or is a space marine's system immune to such mundane fluctuations of bodily conduct?
Moktor wrote: No one should be complaining about this codex. It gave regular Eldar a much needed buff by allowing us to drop Fire Dragons and D-Scythe Wraithguard wherever we want, without scatter. Without this, I almost lost a game once. It was scary. I almost took to buying fixed dice to ensure it never happened again.
SolarCross wrote: Leaving the Eu might be enough to finally pop the real estate bubble, making housing affordable again. That will help young people.
They will continue to be bought up by those already on the property ladder in order to rent out. Houses becoming cheaper merely means that more people can become private landlords.
I honestly can't believe that people ever trusted this guy. What utter degenerate trash this guy is.
No no no. Plenty of folks on dakka said that the £350m was real. They agreed we actually "send" £350m to Brussels. I would quote them but I'm too pissed off.
This is the old destroying the prospects of the young. But the person really to blame is Cameron. He played some internal politics and lost us a country. Scotland will vote leave; I hate to think what will happen in Ireland.
There are already crowds shouting at Polish builders, telling them they'll be out soon.
I don't blame the misguided who've voted leave in my heart; I blame the man responsible for calling this Referendum, the most catastrophic error of the last half century.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/24 14:25:34
SolarCross wrote: Leaving the Eu might be enough to finally pop the real estate bubble, making housing affordable again. That will help young people.
To your first point, yes, it will pop that bubble, of that I really have no doubt. On your second point, if all the uncertainty this decision will generate locks up corporate investment then you'll not see much job growth...quite the opposite, actually...so housing prices coming down won't mean much if the job front is bleak.
kb_lock wrote: Without fear mongering, did we just watch the death of Britain?
Scotland wanted to stay in the eu, which is why they stayed in gb, that would absolutely be cause for a new referendum for them.
That is a given that the SNP will demand another referendum. Westminster can point to the last one and say this is a once a generation event.
You cant change government 'mid term', just because you dont like policy changes.
... ....
By Cameron resigning the UK is changing government 'mid term' because we don't like the policy. There will be a new prime minister when he goes and the new PM will appoint a new cabinet.
This is one reason why I think a general election is advisable before cracking on with Brexit. It would offer Scotland the chance to make plain their desire for independence and EU membership by electing 100% SNPMPs with a good margin.
Westminster FPTP elections are awful for determining the will of the people, that's the very point of referendums. At the Scottish elections we put a pro-indy majority in Holyrood using a system of proportional representation, that is who will speak for us now, and it will be through a referendum that we ourselves will speak.
Dismay seems to be quickly turning to resolve up here - even my postie greeted me this morning with a gak-eating grin and "indyref2 eh? haha"
Bottle wrote: Today is a terrible result for the UK.
Even with the best intentions the Leave result today has put in motion the dissolution of the UK as Scottish secession is now the likely outcome.
We're likely to see a second Scottish referendum before October when Article 50 will be submitted by the new PM. I say, good on the Scots - but this is a terrible day for the rest of us.
October is unlikely. It's more probable we'll see the Scottish Government open up lines direct to the EU to clarify everything first, then call the referendum closer to the end of the UK's negotiation period assuming they can get an assurance of rapid accession in the event of a Yes vote.
They are both awful.
FPTP produced a Tory majority government with only 36% of the votes.
The Scottish Referendum produced a 55 to 45 % against result, but is now being ignored by people like you, because now a different referendum has given a result that can be seen to conflict and produces a situation more to your taste.
The Brexit referendum produced a 51.8 to 48.2 % in favour. A majority for Brexit but not a ringing endorsement by the people especially considering the wide variances geographically, as seen by the example of Scotland.
I know you've keen on Scottish independence, but I think the situation is difficult enough ATM without pushing for another referendum in the very near future.
First there must be a general election. Then a new government must be formed that has the political will and strength to push through the Article 50 process. Once the results of that begin to emerge, Scotland will have a better view of the suitability of staying in or leaving the Union, and can begin to make arrangements accordingly.
You'll have to clarify how I'm "ignoring" the result. Are we in the UK or not? We are. Am I arguing that the Scottish Parliament should have rejected the 2014 result and made a UDI? No. Implying I'm being anti-democratic by continuing to democratically advocate for a political view is farcical. The Scottish Parliament has a pro-indy majority, put there two months ago with nobody under any illusions what was going to happen if the UK actually voted Leave and we voted Remain, and the Tories ran an explicitly "no referendum under any circumstances" campaign and barely broke 20%, so there's no arguing this situation is some unjustified, out-of-the-blue attempt to "overturn" the previous result.
I do think it's kind of cute you think there's going to be an election though. The Tories will pick either May or Boris at their conference, they will be the new PM, there aren't going to be any new elections - the Tories don't want one, and Labour is already tearing itself to pieces with Blairites launching a coup against Corbyn so they're in no position to fight for one.
As for the situation being difficult enough - sorry, but tough. The EU isn't a serious political issue up here, we didn't want this referendum, we didn't need it, and we've made our wishes clear - I see no reason we should sit on our hands waiting for Labour to finish their civil war and the Tories to take us to the brink of losing our EU citizenship before we act.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
Goliath wrote: I like the part where he stated that we managed to leave "without a single shot being fired" a week after the murder of Jo Cox.
He was referencing the end of the Soviet Union, which as was often said "collapsed without a single shot being fired". You probably know that, but are just using Jo Cox to trash Nigel.
If you perchance thought that your London banking job would be safe with Britain outside the European Union, you were wrong. Consultants working for leading strategy firms in London say banks have activated their contingency plans and that the London job cuts are about to come thick and fast.
“You’re looking at 50,000 to 70,000 London finance jobs being moved overseas in the next 12 months,” says one consultant working with one of the top finance strategy firms in the City. “Jobs are going to be cut, and those cuts are going to start next week.”
Jamie Dimon already sent a memo to J.P. Morgan staff in London saying that the US bank, “may need to make changes to our European legal entity structure and the location of some roles.” The consultant suggested this is an understatement: “J.P. Morgan has just let four buildings in Madrid and six buildings in Frankfurt. All the banks have been planning this for weeks. At 7.30am this morning, their contingency plans kicked in.”
Dimon said previously that 4,000 of J.P. Morgan’s 16,000 UK jobs could move overseas if Britain leaves the European Union. J.P. Morgan declined to comment.
A financial services partner at another leading strategy consulting firm, also speaking on condition of anonymity, agreed that the impact of the Brexit vote will be felt soon rather than later in London finance circles. “These banks are going to start moving roles overseas very quickly,” he said, citing one client which has made preparations to move 1,000 roles out of the City. “The impact on the London economy is going to be dire.”
Chris Wheeler, banking analyst at Atlantic Equities agrees: “There are going to be a mass of finance jobs moving out of this country and they’re going to move soon. Anyone who thinks J.P. Morgan or Morgan Stanley are going to wait years before moving their thousands of jobs is in cloud cuckoo land. They’ll want to get uncertainty out of the way and to comply as soon as possible. This is the biggest change in London since the Big Bang.”
London bankers who think they’re in with a chance to move to Madrid or Dublin could be sorely disappointed. Consultants are in agreement: roles will be cut in London rather than migrated overseas. “Why would you move someone who’s earning £150k in London to do a £60k job in Frankfurt,” said one.”Banks are going to use this as an opportunity to cut costs.”
London bonuses are also likely to plummet this year, dealing a double blow to staff at European banks who’ve seen the value of previous years’ bonus deferrals collapse. “This is just going to hammer people,” says one headhunter. “If you’re a banker in London now, you’re going to stop spending. Cancel the nanny. Cancel the holiday. Cancel the extension.”
Continental European financial centres will benefit from London’s pain. “For European banks, front office jobs are going to be repatriated to the home country – wherever that bank has it’s headquarters. Back and middle office jobs are a different matter,” said the consultant. “There, you’re looking at Dublin, Poland, or the Czech Republic.”
The real question is where US banks will choose to relocate their European headquarters. Goldman Sachs has a sixth of all its employees globally in the City and is in the process of building a big new European HQ in London’s Farringdon – although consultants said it’s been quietly looking at subletting space in the building before it’s even finished. Morgan Stanley president Colm Kelleher touted Dublin or Frankfurt as potential locations for Morgan Stanley’s European HQ in future. Madrid is a new option – and a wild card, but one consultant said it’s popular with bankers who will be kept on: “The senior guys are all hoping for Madrid.”
As bankers in London stare over a precipice, the consultants we spoke to are doing just fine. “The emails from clients are coming right, left and centre,” said one. “30 projects across different banks went live for us this morning,” said the other “All the big strategy firms, McKinsey & Co. Bain, Boston Consulting are being dragged in. Everything needs to change.”
If they do move in the numbers being talked about the loss of tax revenue is somewhere between 2.5.5 billion £s -- apparently, not my calculations.
Or I guess we cut them/the banks -- yet another -- sweetner deal ?
Fingers crossed this is mainly bluster and hot air.
.. doesn't seem like it though.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
I don't blame the misguided who've voted leave in my heart; I blame the man responsible for calling this Referendum, the most catastrophic error of the last half century.
The problem is that the negotiations and referendum are nothing to do with Britain's place in Europe, and everything to do with the Conservative Party's place in the UK. Cameron wants to shut up the anti-EU wing of the party else they will start to create the same kind of shenanigans they did for John Major in the early 90s. He also wants to reduce UKIP's baneful influence. The Conservatives have a wafer thin majority that was gained off the back of a very limited plurality at the last general election, so anything that damages the party's membership is a serious danger to Cameron and Osborne's chances of staying in power.
This will work if the referendum result is to get out, but that isn't what Cameron wants as we already know he supports staying in. If the result is to stay, it probably won't shut up all of the antis, and it certainly won't shut up UKIP.
Meanwhile, serious issues like EU bureaucracy and democratic deficit are better tackled from within the EU than outside, by cooperating with other members who have similar concerns. If Britain leaves, that opportunity is lost for a generation. If Britain stays, Cameron may have used up so much political capital with his footling negotiations that our influence on the larger matters will have been seriously reduced for a while. Either way, the EU isn't going to go away, so Britain has to continue to deal with it basically as it is constructed now.
So really, this referendum does absolutely nothing useful for anyone, except the antis if we get a vote to leave.
Goliath wrote: I like the part where he stated that we managed to leave "without a single shot being fired" a week after the murder of Jo Cox.
He was referencing the end of the Soviet Union, which as was often said "collapsed without a single shot being fired". You probably know that, but are just using Jo Cox to trash Nigel.
Oh, I guess since it was a historical reference made in bad taste rather than just a comment in bad taste it's completely fine then.
I know fully well that it's a reference to the Soviet Union, the problem is that it's a reference that he shouldn't have fething made!
But hey, I'm the one that's out of order here. Your contributions to the thread have been nothing but civil, like stating that those that support remain are treasonous.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/06/24 14:37:23
Kilkrazy wrote: You're ignoring the result of the 2014 referendum that rejected independence by 55:45 and you want a new referendum.
That's a completely ridiculous claim and you know it is. It's like saying I'm ignoring the result of the last general election because I'm campaigning in the next one for a party that didn't win it. Scotland remains within the UK and no serious voices from the independence movement have argued for a UDI - those are the only two requirements for the 2014 result being respected. The question was "Should Scotland be an independent country?", not "Should Scotland be an independent country and after this nobody can argue differently or change their mind for at least twenty years". A pro-indy majority in the Scottish parliament was considered sufficient justification for a referendum last time, so what is different - is there some quota of self-determination that we have exceeded?
Better Together explicitly and repeatedly tied voting No to retaining EU citizenship, and for a lot of people that was a major motivator in how they chose to vote. I don't see how it's unreasonable given the democratically-elected(and a good deal moreso than WM) Scottish Parliament election results two months ago, to offer those people a chance to reconsider. And I don't see why we should make that offer based on when it's most convenient for the government which is making t necessary in the first place.
"Your society's broken, so who should we blame? Should we blame the rich, powerful people who caused it? No, lets blame the people with no power and no money and those immigrants who don't even have the vote. Yea, it must be their fething fault." - Iain M Banks
-----
"The language of modern British politics is meant to sound benign. But words do not mean what they seem to mean. 'Reform' actually means 'cut' or 'end'. 'Flexibility' really means 'exploit'. 'Prudence' really means 'don't invest'. And 'efficient'? That means whatever you want it to mean, usually 'cut'. All really mean 'keep wages low for the masses, taxes low for the rich, profits high for the corporations, and accept the decline in public services and amenities this will cause'." - Robin McAlpine from Common Weal
Goliath wrote: Oh, I guess since it was a historical reference made in bad taste rather than just a comment in bad taste it's completely fine then.
I know fully well that it's a reference to the Soviet Union, the problem is that it's a reference that he shouldn't have fething made!
But hey, I'm the one that's out of order here. Your contributions to the thread have been nothing but civil, like stating that those that support remain are treasonous.
Yes it is completely fine to reference the collapse of the Soviet Union in the context of the Brexit. It is only bad taste in your head but then waving corpses around to slander politicians you don't like is completely fine to you. So not sure you are a good arbiter of taste.
Voting to surrender sovereignty to a foreign empire is the living definition of treason.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/06/24 14:50:45
Pull your head in SolarCross. Remember to be polite.
To the rest of the thread, you're doing a much better job than pre-vote of keeping on topic and being polite with such a potentially charged topic. Good job
I wish I had time for all the game systems I own, let alone want to own...
Statement Regarding British Referendum on E.U. Membership
The people of the United Kingdom have exercised the sacred right of all free peoples. They have declared their independence from the European Union, and have voted to reassert control over their own politics, borders and economy. A Trump Administration pledges to strengthen our ties with a free and independent Britain, deepening our bonds in commerce, culture and mutual defense. The whole world is more peaceful and stable when our two countries – and our two peoples – are united together, as they will be under a Trump Administration.
Come November, the American people will have the chance to re-declare their independence. Americans will have a chance to vote for trade, immigration and foreign policies that put our citizens first. They will have the chance to reject today’s rule by the global elite, and to embrace real change that delivers a government of, by and for the people. I hope America is watching, it will soon be time to believe in America again.
Anyone heard of any statements from Obama/Clinton? (or the Real Trump? )
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/06/24 15:19:30
Goliath wrote: Oh, I guess since it was a historical reference made in bad taste rather than just a comment in bad taste it's completely fine then.
I know fully well that it's a reference to the Soviet Union, the problem is that it's a reference that he shouldn't have fething made!
But hey, I'm the one that's out of order here. Your contributions to the thread have been nothing but civil, like stating that those that support remain are treasonous.
Yes it is completely fine to reference the collapse of the Soviet Union in the context of the Brexit. It is only bad taste in your head but then waving corpses around to slander politicians you don't like is completely fine to you. So not sure you are a good arbiter of taste.
Voting to surrender sovereignty to a foreign empire is the living definition of treason.
He made a demonstrably false statement! I don't give a gak if it was a reference to the Soviet Union, it was fething incorrect due to the fact that a fething politician was shot you [redacted by moderator]! If I make some reference to a million deaths having been a statistic it doesn't suddenly make it okay if I said it when a million people have just died just because it was a historic reference! Jesus fething Christ.
It isn't just bad taste in my head, it is in bad taste in general society. But then again you seem to have Farage halfway down your throat, so [I'm] not sure you are a good arbiter of taste.
No, it isn't the fething definition of treason.
A fething dictionary wrote:treason
ˈtriːz(ə)n/
noun
the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government.
"they were convicted of treason"
That is the definition of treason. You do not get to make up new meanings of words just because you want to sound like you're tough.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/06/24 15:31:35
