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.

 Whirlwind wrote:
The point being missed though is that this all costs money which has got to come from somewhere.

And the money is going to come from UK. Other countries are looking for their benefits first and only and don't give ratass about UK. If it costs more money to stay in UK than move they will move and UK's interests can go to hell.

Japan sure as hell ain't going to pay one yen more than they have to because of UK's decision.

tneva82 wrote:

 Whirlwind wrote:
The point being missed though is that this all costs money which has got to come from somewhere.

And the money is going to come from UK. Other countries are looking for their benefits first and only and don't give ratass about UK. If it costs more money to stay in UK than move they will move and UK's interests can go to hell.

Japan sure as hell ain't going to pay one yen more than they have to because of UK's decision.

Exactly

This is confirmation as to what we already knew, more or less. Most countries in the world and their businesses couldn't give a damn if we're in the EU politically or not. What they care about is whether or not we're in the single market.

May's come out and said that she's going to aim for a 'tailor-made' deal, as opposed to anything based on an existing model. In the long term, that's the most sensible suggestion, it might cause short term upheaval/economic distress, but it ensures the groundwork is laid for future prosperity, rather than rushing in to accept a carbon copy of an existing deal or reverting to WTO that might serve us poorly in the years to come. Considering she had the Italian Prime Minister next to her as she said it, it would appear the announcement has Italy's tacit endorsement (which would jibe with the other noises Italian ministers have made).

It all comes down to France. If Hollande hangs around, this negotiation is going to be one tough cookie, if he leaves, not so much. So I doubt we'll see anything move, statesmen, businesses, or negotiations of any kind, until Hollande's fate is determined. There's going to be a lot of noise, but everyone's holding their breath and waiting to see what happens in France so the horse trading can begin in earnest. The Japanese are indicating what's important to them as a way to pressure for the result they want (us in the common market), and I doubt they're alone in that.

Obama meanwhile, is throwing his toys out the cot because the British population didn't do what he wanted. Fortunately, what he thinks about matters won't be an issue for much longer either.

I always end up having to exalt your posts Ketara. I don't know if it actually does anything or not, but I feel like I need to do it all the same.

On a less Brexit-y note... Labour Party continue to amaze me with their levels of fail.

Keith Vaz, Chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee= hypocrite

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37269919

 angelofvengeance wrote:
On a less Brexit-y note... Labour Party continue to amaze me with their levels of fail.

Keith Vaz, Chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee= hypocrite

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37269919

Spoiler:

Labour MP Keith Vaz paid for the services of male escorts, the Sunday Mirror has reported.
The married father-of-two paid for the men to visit him one evening last month at a flat he owns in London, it claims.
The Leicester East MP, 59, said he was referring the claims to his solicitor.
Several newspapers report that Mr Vaz is to step down as Home Affairs Select Committee chairman but he has not confirmed this, saying he will tell the committee his plans first on Tuesday.
'Privilege'
He said: "It is deeply disturbing that a national newspaper should have paid individuals to have acted in this way.
"I have referred these allegations to my solicitor Mark Stephens of Howard Kennedy who will consider them carefully and advise me accordingly."
He also described it as a "privilege" to be the chairman of the select committee, which monitors crime and drugs policy, for the past nine years.
"I will of course inform committee members first of my plans when we meet on Tuesday. My decision has been based entirely on what is in the best interests of the committee."
Meanwhile, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn described the allegations as a "private matter".
He said: "He [Keith Vaz] is going to meet the Home Affairs Select Committee and discuss with them what his role will be in the future, I'm not sure what his decision will be I will leave it to him to decide on that.
"He has not committed any crime that I know of, as far I'm aware it is a private matter."
Keith Vaz biography:
Born to Goan parents in Aden, Yemen, he went to Cambridge University where he studied law and then became a solicitor
The Labour Party politician has been MP for Leicester East since 1987
He is Parliament's longest-serving British Asian MP and has chaired the influential Home Affairs Select Committee since 2007
He was Britain's Minister for Europe under Tony Blair and said the vote to leave the EU was a "catastrophe"
His sister Valerie is Labour MP for Walsall South
Keith Vaz - the 'Teflon politician'
According to the Sunday Mirror, Mr Vaz's meeting with two male escorts included a discussion about using the party drug known as Poppers.
Mr Vaz had opposed government attempts to criminalise the drug. Ministers later announced they would remain within the law.
His committee is also currently overseeing a review of the UK's prostitution laws.

In response to Mr Vaz's statement criticising the Sunday Mirror, a spokeswoman for the newspaper said the company did not want to be drawn into an argument on the details but said the paper "stands by the story".
'Dreadful time'
When asked about the allegations, shadow health secretary Diane Abbott said: "I've known Keith for over 30 years. I think this must be a dreadful time for him and his family - his wife and his two children - and I'd rather not comment."
Conservative former Culture Secretary John Whittingdale said it was right for Mr Vaz to temporarily step aside.
"Keith Vaz, as I understand it, has said he will stand aside from the chairmanship and, given the areas for which the committee is responsible, that does seem to me to be a sensible course of action."

How is he a hypocrite? As far as I am aware he has never called for criminalisation of prostitution.

I've got to agree with mallus here from a literal perspective, but i still think that anyone who gains the title 'MP' and the accolade of 'right, honourable' should behave in a manner befitting it.

It's going to be tough trying to prove the guy has paid for sexual services (i don't think 'escorts' themselves are illegal) though so i don't see how he's going to lose anything but reputation in the short-term unless he decides to.

A few interesting articles on the BBC regarding Wrexit today:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37271417
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37271420

In a nut shell a point's based immigration system is unlikely
The £100m a week isn't likely to spent on the NHS or reducing VAT bills

So a bit more confirmation that the Leave campaign messages were based on fairy tales...

However the most interesting part are the polls. Although 62% believe the UK will be OK post Brexit 26% have considered leaving the UK and 43% of 18-34 year olds.

If this number of young people actually happened that would be a massive hit to economy both now and in the future (although maybe it might be the way to get the government to consider them more highly). It's unlikely that all these people will actually leave but suppose only 10% of 18-34 years old do actually migrate. That's a significant piece of your workforce that you expect to be bringing in taxes and spending for a generation (and lets not forget that these are the people that will also bring up the next generation too, so it's also a long term effect). It's less of an issue if retired people emigrate to spain because the input into the economy is less, but young people leaving is not good news as it makes the viability of things like pensions, the NHS (which all require a young healthy population to support an aging, non-working population) a lot less viable. In addition if too many young people leave then it makes businesses less likely to stick around because they just can't employ a long term viable workforce (so developing the younger generation into the new managers, engineers, scientists, teachers etc). Ironically the only way you would be able to support this level of emigration would be if you increased immigration to compensate...

I can't blame them for wanting to leave the UK though, given the results I'm actively looking at the options for moving to the EU (although at 38 I'm slightly outside the polling group) because I'm not happy with the direction the Country is going in. These sort of polls also make me want to leave more because it means by the time I get to retire there will be no choice but to decrease expenditure on areas that I might need at that age.

Having almost half of our work-age youth considering leaving the country after a vote really should open some eyes. They are the ones we need to keep in order to pay for, well, everything in in 30 years when everyone else has retired. We really should be trying to figure out *why*.

Why should i pay into a pension pot when I am likely never going to get one myself?

Do you mean a private pension or the state pension funded by the National Insurance component of taxation?

 Future War Cultist wrote:
I'm not worried. I just remembered how Ford moved its production of transits from the UK to Turkey. Using an EU loan to do so. Why would a company looking to sell to the EU move outside of it if doing so would hinder it from selling there? Nah, there's always around it I'm sure.

Doesn't Turkey have some special free-access-of-goods arrangement? So they potentially have less barriers to trade than we will, if we're so adamant about this immigration red herring.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Optio wrote:
Why should i pay into a pension pot when I am likely never going to get one myself?

It's more than just pension. When the current working population retire and stop paying tax (on the whole), and there's no younger population to take over, it means there will be massive deficits in public funding, staff, and care work. Ironically, chasing off half of your future workforce to reduce immigration is going to result in us requiring unprecedented immigration - we'll need to bring over foreigners by the million just to keep the lights on.

In companies, it's always important to have exit interviews when staff leave, to address the reasons. If we're likely to see an exodus of this scale* then we really need to do the same.

*I'm 32 and considering moving into Europe. I'm in a higher-rate tax band. Where will my tax-spend be compensated for?

 Optio wrote:
Why should i pay into a pension pot when I am likely never going to get one myself?

This is about your state pension. You are already paying for this. There is no 'pension pot'. The principle is that those still working are taxed to pay for the state pension; when you retire in x number of years those still working will be paying for your pension. This only works though if you can bring enough tax into they system to support it. If you have an aging population like ours in the UK (not as bad as Germany or Japan though) then you have more pensioners than workers paying tax and either the workers have to be taxed more or the pensions are cut. (There's an argument that the way the future state pension works isn't viable even now).

This is exacerbated that pensioners generally will draw on the public expenditure in other areas more than the younger generation too. For example currently 20% of UK expenditure goes on pensions, 18% of health (lets assume 50% of this is on the older generation) and 14% on welfare (lets say 50% of this goes to the older generation such as bus passes, old age homes etc). That's roughly a third of all state expenditure on people 65+ (compare to education that only gets 11%).

To maintain the same level in the future this percentage has got to rise because of the aging nature of our population. However if you suddenly lose 5-10% of your youth that will be paying for these services you are hit twice, because you have lost income form the increasingly retiring population and the loss of taxes from the younger generation (which as I alluded to may continue for several generations as the babies are taken elsewhere). Effectively what you get now will be unviable or you tax the younger generation to the hilt, but that will only encourage more to leave).

Plenty of people emigrate and always have. I doubt 10% of the youth population will emigrate. OTOH I doubt we are going to be able to control immigration down to 100,000 per year for a number of reasons.

The key thing for a lot of people is what balance we can achieve between highly desirable access to the EU market against how much limitation of the principle of free movement. Whatever deal is achieved of course is likely to be reciprocal and will limit the ability of British to emigrate abroad.

I am well aware that it is not technically a pot and where the money comes from. It is still in essence a pot though. One which I am unlikely to get much back from.

 Optio wrote:
I am well aware that it is not technically a pot and where the money comes from. It is still in essence a pot though. One which I am unlikely to get much back from.

Why not? Are you not expecting to age, get ill, or have children?

[Apologies if that's too personal, I'm just curious as to why you think you won't get anything back out. Personally, I'm fully expecting that I won't be able to retire until I'm about 70, and then it'll be awful]

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Plenty of people emigrate and always have. I doubt 10% of the youth population will emigrate. OTOH I doubt we are going to be able to control immigration down to 100,000 per year for a number of reasons.

The key thing for a lot of people is what balance we can achieve between highly desirable access to the EU market against how much limitation of the principle of free movement. Whatever deal is achieved of course is likely to be reciprocal and will limit the ability of British to emigrate abroad.

Perhaps, but the number of young people that I know of that are actively looking really does put some weight behind this poll shows just how seriously the younger generation think the issue is. We are not also immune to losing working age people if the economy starts becoming a bit wonky and better prospects are abroad. IIRC I remember seeing an article saying within a few days of the vote encouraging people to move to Germany if they wanted to stay in the EU. The EU (and particularly Germany) is not going to hesitate to 'poach' well educated (especially younger) people from the UK if it is in their interest to do so and in reality such people generally earn more so the cost to UK is higher (as they spent the money educating them and then they give the Country two fingers).

It's been a few pages since his name was mentioned, but I hear rumours that Nigel Farage is threatning to make a comeback with the Nigel Farage party

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Plenty of people emigrate and always have. I doubt 10% of the youth population will emigrate. OTOH I doubt we are going to be able to control immigration down to 100,000 per year for a number of reasons.

The key thing for a lot of people is what balance we can achieve between highly desirable access to the EU market against how much limitation of the principle of free movement. Whatever deal is achieved of course is likely to be reciprocal and will limit the ability of British to emigrate abroad.

Perhaps, but the number of young people that I know of that are actively looking really does put some weight behind this poll shows just how seriously the younger generation think the issue is. We are not also immune to losing working age people if the economy starts becoming a bit wonky and better prospects are abroad. IIRC I remember seeing an article saying within a few days of the vote encouraging people to move to Germany if they wanted to stay in the EU. The EU (and particularly Germany) is not going to hesitate to 'poach' well educated (especially younger) people from the UK if it is in their interest to do so and in reality such people generally earn more so the cost to UK is higher (as they spent the money educating them and then they give the Country two fingers).

I hear what you are saying however the fact is talented Brits have always emigrated all over the world where they are in demand. It has been easier to go to the EU due to free movement, and more difficult due to languages. Things will ge a bit more difficult due to the end of free movement, but it just means the top level people will be creamed off.

Anyway, being a citizen, an ex-pat Brit can always "come home" if they want to.

There used to be a saying about "FILTH" -- Failed In London Try Hong Kong.

Very few Brits move abroad for work, percentage wise. Probably enough to be a rounding error once you remove retirees and gap year workers.

According to this article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11620356/Emigration-nation-who-are-the-thousands-fleeing-Britain-each-year.html

323,000 Brits emigrated in 2015. 43% of 18-32's is in the region of 5,000,000.

Assuming all British migrants left for work, that's still a massive discrepancy.

I don't think this can be written off as "people always migrate for work". Even if 10% of those looking to move actually do, that's quite a population hit we'll need to recruit back.

If the Tories are allowed to continue their policies of managed decline, selling off everything that's not nailed down to the highest bidder, and the enrichment of their friends and allies in the City of London and the SE of England, then this country will struggle post-BREXIT.

A bold vision, fit for the 21st century, will see this country prosper and the world will be our oyster.

Two major roadblocks stand in the way of this though:

1) The non-Tory, Tory party, which is standing in the way of a genuine Conservative movement, which this country badly needs.

2) The walking zombie that calls itself the Labour party,expiry date 1983.

Once these are swept away, and new parties formed, which genuinely reflect the post-referendum views of the country, then we may stand a chance, but as long as we stick with these discredited pillars of the establishment, it will be business as usual.

And business as usual won't cut it foe the UK these days...

Is there any real possibility of political reform, beyond full-blown revolution?

Herzlos wrote:
Very few Brits move abroad for work, percentage wise. Probably enough to be a rounding error once you remove retirees and gap year workers.

According to this article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11620356/Emigration-nation-who-are-the-thousands-fleeing-Britain-each-year.html

323,000 Brits emigrated in 2015. 43% of 18-32's is in the region of 5,000,000.

Assuming all British migrants left for work, that's still a massive discrepancy.

I don't think this can be written off as "people always migrate for work". Even if 10% of those looking to move actually do, that's quite a population hit we'll need to recruit back.

Yes I'm not suggesting that all of those looking will actually leave. We also don't know why people are looking to leave; junior doctors might be looking to leave because they are fed up with the pay and conditions; young bankers may be looking to leave if their banks are seriously considering the options of relocating to the EU if they don't get the right Wrexit agreement; scientists may be looking to leave so they can get guaranteed access to EU funds etc.

However say 5% actually did leave for one reason or another; that's about 500k which is not outside the realms of impossibility. It's a bit like the introduction of AoS, many people carried on with WFB because despite niggles they still felt it was the system for them. However when AoS came along it gave the impetuous to make a break. The same could happen here with people eventually reach a breaking point. You then potentially have the issue that it becomes a snowball that keeps growing, people emigrate, the companies can't hire the staff they want, they move, that's less jobs, meaning more people look at emigrating and so on. And remember it might not be unreasonable to consider that Scotland and NI might be countries you can emigrate to but remain in the EU in the not too distant future and then there is no language barrier.

Even a small shift in the number of young people emigrating will put greater strain on the ability of us to provide services that are massively weighted to the retired (or pre-retirement generation). And the younger generation can't expect to get any breaks from a Tory government as they pander to the 60+ age bracket because they vote in large numbers (and make up most of the Tory membership).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Herzlos wrote:
Is there any real possibility of political reform, beyond full-blown revolution?

Probably not, because the two major parties are too comfortable and are unwilling to surrender the power. Labour had an opportunity to change things and they blew it. You are getting to the point that unless 50% of the population own tools and walk out on protest en masse there's no realistic chance of change because our voting patterns are incredibly stagnant.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


Once these are swept away, and new parties formed, which genuinely reflect the post-referendum views of the country, then we may stand a chance, but as long as we stick with these discredited pillars of the establishment, it will be business as usual.

You mean one party with 50% of the voting share that is pro Europe made up of younger people (in the majority) and 50% of that is pro-Wrexit made of older people (in the majority)?

The concept of any significant number of people leaving is laughable. I saw an identical poll back when David Cameron won the last general election, it's just melodrama.

The fact is, Brexit makes it harder for people to leave purely on the basis of the fact that if we leave the EU, there's nowhere bar this country that you can automatically move in and settle, you have to go through visas and all sorts. Throw in the lack of nationalised healthcare in most countries, the language and culture barriers, and the fact very few people actively enjoy leaving behind all their friends, family and familiar places, and most people who might consider it will err on the stay at home side.

It's one thing to toy with an idea in a fit of politically inspired pique, it's another thing to actually do it. We all have daydreams, but few ever go through with them.

This is without even mentioning the fact that the poll is nothing to get excited about. 26% of 1,032 people is a statistical drop in the ocean. Making it 43% of young people means even less when no figures are given regarding how many of those young people there actually are. For a radio station poll, I'm inclined to think there's less young people voting in the poll proportionately than there are compared to number of them in the general population, which would skew figures further.

Well, bearing in mind the UK currently loses about 150,000 presumably moderately talented people a year, say there was a 10% increase it isn't a serious problem unless they are doctors etc. That said, we already have to import lots of our doctors because we don't produce enough domestically.

 Ketara wrote:
The concept of any significant number of people leaving is laughable. I saw an identical poll back when David Cameron won the last general election, it's just melodrama.

Maybe, but a GE only binds you to 5 years of one form of government so the incentive is less. This potentially, is a once in a generation change in direction. There has been a noted significant upswing in dual citizenship requests in even out the way places like Bulgaria from British nationals wanting to stay within the EU which there wasn't when DC came to power. So the dynamics are different.

 Ketara wrote:
The fact is, Brexit makes it harder for people to leave purely on the basis of the fact that if we leave the EU, there's nowhere bar this country that you can automatically move in and settle, you have to go through visas and all sorts. Throw in the lack of nationalised healthcare in most countries, the language and culture barriers, and the fact very few people actively enjoy leaving behind all their friends, family and familiar places, and most people who might consider it will err on the stay at home side.

Of course we are still in the EU and likely will be until 2020 as the earliest they have said they will issue Article 50 is Jan 2017 and as you have noted they will probably want to get the French elections out the way first so they know who they are dealing with. 2 years from then is mid 2019 which is just before our next GE. So that still leaves plenty of time to move out if they have the desire to and we don't know what the movement rules will look like yet (and how much they are willing to sacrifice business wise); and as I said before if Scotland leaves that is not such a big issue to move there and you can be damn sure that SNP will want to try and persuade people to go there (especially the decently educated). I've also seen German articles that are actively trying to encourage people to move there, even to the point of saying that "don't worry everyone speaks English", so there is active courting of part of the population (in reality Germany is not going to complain about such migrants). Even the foreign language issue is overblown. Post-docs in science go to all sorts of different countries including china, Germany, Italy, spain, chile, france etc and despite that you are talking complex issues there are no language barriers. I think it's a particular UK thing to 'fear' other languages.

 Ketara wrote:
This is without even mentioning the fact that the poll is nothing to get excited about. 26% of 1,032 people is a statistical drop in the ocean. Making it 43% of young people means even less when no figures are given regarding how many of those young people there actually are. For a radio station poll, I'm inclined to think there's less young people voting in the poll proportionately than there are compared to number of them in the general population, which would skew figures further.

We can't say either way, no ones saying 43% of the younger population will leave, though it is an open question how many actually will. However you can make reasonable statistical analysis from the results with a bit of caution (most 'normal' polls in reality only have a thousand or so results). What we don't know are the errors on the data (which I always like to see provided as it gives a better indication of how representative the poll is) but it's not likely that the one sigma result (i.e. that the true result has approx. 60% chance of being within) is +/- 43%. Even if it is +/- 10% that means there is a 60% chance of the 'true' result being somewhere between 33-53% (so could actually be higher). As soon as we go down the route of 'inclined to think' then we are introducing our own bias into the analysis which does skew the results. However one thing we probably can say is that there is about double the number of younger people looking compared to the whole population (within the errors). That in itself is not good news. If you assume that at all ages are equally likely to migrate (probably not true as younger people have less roots) then even if only 0.5% of the population actually migrate then the number of younger people taking this option is probably about double this number. Hence you are artificially aging your population; and with an aging population like ours that is bad because you need to increase your younger population not decrease to ensure your welfare systems are maintained.

Simply the country cannot afford to lose any of its younger population at the moment or else it will need to other immigrants to maintain the same level of output in the long term (which some countries are going to face quite soon, for example Japan). of course I have no issue with increasing migration to offset it but I can see that others would.

Good news everyone!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37274279

Recession fears 'fade' as UK's service sector grows

The UK's services industry rebounded strongly in August, suggesting the country will "avoid recession", according to a closely-watched survey.
The Markit/CIPS purchasing managers' index (PMI) showed activity in UK services recorded the biggest month-on-month rise in the survey's history.
The index rose from 47.4 in July to 52.9 in August. A score above 50 indicates growth.
It effectively takes services back to pre-referendum levels, Markit said.
The PMI is a survey of business managers, gauging whether their firm's activity has increased compared with the previous month.
The return to growth for the services industry - which accounts for nearly 80% of the UK economy - adds to signs of recovery in manufacturing and construction last month.
There had been fears of two consecutive quarters of falls in economic growth - the usual definition of a recession - but Chris Williamson, chief economist at Markit, said the survey findings suggested there would be a modest 0.1% expansion in GDP in the three months to September.
'Buck Brexit'
Sterling rose sharply after the release of the PMI survey, rising 0.6% against the dollar before falling back slightly to just over $1.33.
Last month's recovery in services wiped out a shock fall in July following the Brexit vote.
"A record rise in the services PMI adds to the encouraging news seen in the manufacturing and construction sectors in August to suggest that an imminent recession will be avoided," Mr Williamson said.
It is still too early to call the "start of a sustained post-shock recovery, but there's plenty of anecdotal evidence to indicate that the initial shock of the June vote has begun to dissipate", he said.
He added: "Many companies are seeing business return to normal either simply by customer confidence rising or a stoic determination to 'Buck Brexit' and carry on regardless."

Computing and IT, financial services, hotels and restaurants contributed to the recovery, according to the survey.
"The services PMI completes a triple-whammy of good economic data for the UK in the last three trading sessions and indicates that businesses are returning to normal after the initial shock of the vote rocked confidence," said Neil Wilson, a financial market analyst at ETX Capital.
'Overstates recovery'
Other analysts, however, warned the PMI findings should be treated with some caution.
"Just as the July survey probably overstated the economy's underlying weakness, the August survey probably overstates its subsequent recovery," said Scott Bowman, UK economist at Capital Economics.
Growth in services was already subdued before the EU referendum, with a score of 52.3 in June - the lowest in more than three years.
Meanwhile, manufacturing body EEF says output from Britain's factories slowed down in the last three months and is unlikely to grow until the end of year.

 Mr. Burning wrote:
Good news everyone!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37274279

Recession fears 'fade' as UK's service sector grows

I would advise caution on these figures. If you take the two months then there hasn't really been any change, but there are things that should be taken into account.

(a) We've had a pleasant August which always gets more people out than average
(b) The weak £ might have brought more people into the UK for holidays which will last for a few months but wouldn't hold up in the winter (conversely snap holidays abroad may have gone down so I don't expect it to be all roses)
(c) People might be buying early Xmas presents in anticipation that inflation is rising to make the most of money (I know I am and I know others are too).
(d) These are not the long term effects from Wrexit as we haven't left yet and it takes many months for real changes to start feeding through. Nothing has yet happened to affect peoples wallets. If there is to be a recession it will likely be towards the end of 2018/2019 as companies start leaving, unemployment increases, wage growth stagnates, investment falls and inflation starts biting etc etc.

 Whirlwind wrote:

Maybe, but a GE only binds you to 5 years of one form of government so the incentive is less. This potentially, is a once in a generation change in direction. There has been a noted significant upswing in dual citizenship requests in even out the way places like Bulgaria from British nationals wanting to stay within the EU which there wasn't when DC came to power. So the dynamics are different.

I don't doubt that anyone who can get dual citizenship will grab it with open arms, I know I would! That's still a bit different kettle of fish, and for all the 'once in a generation' schpiel, the effects of this won't be felt for another generation at least. If you know people who plan that far ahead in their personal lives to the extent that they're shuffling countries on the chance things might get worse in some vague regard, you mix with a better class of people than me. Most of the ones I know barely know what they're doing this weekend (and that includes the people making the melodramatic 'leave the country comments on my facebook').

Of course we are still in the EU and likely will be until 2020 as the earliest they have said they will issue Article 50 is Jan 2017 and as you have noted they will probably want to get the French elections out the way first so they know who they are dealing with. 2 years from then is mid 2019 which is just before our next GE. So that still leaves plenty of time to move out if they have the desire to

You've just pointed out (even if you didn't mean it) why moving abroad to Europe right now would be worse: the uncertainty. Just because you move now doesn't mean you'll have the right to reside in five years times. Depending on negotiations, you might be sent home in four years. For people concerned with their long term future, that would be a remarkable concern, one would think.

And if there's no/little difference with regards to settlement at the end of it all, one would have thought that moving country a vastly overblown response to the whole thing after all.

and we don't know what the movement rules will look like yet (and how much they are willing to sacrifice business wise); and as I said before if Scotland leaves that is not such a big issue to move there and you can be damn sure that SNP will want to try and persuade people to go there (especially the decently educated).

Scotland won't be going independent for at least another decade. There will be absolutely no appetite in the British Government to look at that whilst the Brexit thing is ongoing, and now that oil has tanked, the ardour of many past voters for independence has waned. Oil was always the leg upon which maintaining current living standards independently relied. Even if oil production in the Middle-East suddenly dives, Iran and Russia could re-enter the market at any time, fracking has been making progress, and large deposits have been found in a few new locations. Odds are it won't pick up again.

I suppose it's not impossible, but again, if you know people planning on emigrating based on a highly unlikely set of circumstances lining up, you're a better man then me Gunga Din!

I've also seen German articles that are actively trying to encourage people to move there, even to the point of saying that "don't worry everyone speaks English", so there is active courting of part of the population (in reality Germany is not going to complain about such migrants). Even the foreign language issue is overblown. Post-docs in science go to all sorts of different countries including china, Germany, Italy, spain, chile, france etc and despite that you are talking complex issues there are no language barriers. I think it's a particular UK thing to 'fear' other languages.

You can get by in European countries, but you get the same in many non-European countries as well. There's more to a language barrier than making yourself understood abroad.

We can't say either way, no ones saying 43% of the younger population will leave, though it is an open question how many actually will. However you can make reasonable statistical analysis from the results with a bit of caution (most 'normal' polls in reality only have a thousand or so results). What we don't know are the errors on the data (which I always like to see provided as it gives a better indication of how representative the poll is) but it's not likely that the one sigma result (i.e. that the true result has approx. 60% chance of being within) is +/- 43%. Even if it is +/- 10% that means there is a 60% chance of the 'true' result being somewhere between 33-53% (so could actually be higher). As soon as we go down the route of 'inclined to think' then we are introducing our own bias into the analysis which does skew the results. However one thing we probably can say is that there is about double the number of younger people looking compared to the whole population (within the errors). That in itself is not good news. If you assume that at all ages are equally likely to migrate (probably not true as younger people have less roots) then even if only 0.5% of the population actually migrate then the number of younger people taking this option is probably about double this number. Hence you are artificially aging your population; and with an aging population like ours that is bad because you need to increase your younger population not decrease to ensure your welfare systems are maintained.

I'll be blunt, if the level of statistical proof given in this poll is to be taken as a genuine population wide inclination, I could produce reports with equivalent numbers of people that can prove just about anything. Vastly more people were polled for the general election, and yet the result was nowhere near what was expected. For something vague as 'Have you thought about moving abroad', crikey, I've done that and I voted Brexit!

 Ketara wrote:
This is confirmation as to what we already knew, more or less. Most countries in the world and their businesses couldn't give a damn if we're in the EU politically or not. What they care about is whether or not we're in the single market.

May's come out and said that she's going to aim for a 'tailor-made' deal, as opposed to anything based on an existing model. In the long term, that's the most sensible suggestion, it might cause short term upheaval/economic distress, but it ensures the groundwork is laid for future prosperity, rather than rushing in to accept a carbon copy of an existing deal or reverting to WTO that might serve us poorly in the years to come. Considering she had the Italian Prime Minister next to her as she said it, it would appear the announcement has Italy's tacit endorsement (which would jibe with the other noises Italian ministers have made).

It all comes down to France. If Hollande hangs around, this negotiation is going to be one tough cookie, if he leaves, not so much. So I doubt we'll see anything move, statesmen, businesses, or negotiations of any kind, until Hollande's fate is determined. There's going to be a lot of noise, but everyone's holding their breath and waiting to see what happens in France so the horse trading can begin in earnest. The Japanese are indicating what's important to them as a way to pressure for the result they want (us in the common market), and I doubt they're alone in that.

Obama meanwhile, is throwing his toys out the cot because the British population didn't do what he wanted. Fortunately, what he thinks about matters won't be an issue for much longer either.

So, basically May will revive Cameron's February deal but this time with the UK nominally outside of the EU. Why would the French be the problem? With no UK representation in Brussels they are rid of the main backer of the pro-Atlantic relations and neoliberal reforms in EU politics, that is a wet dream for any French president.

The rest is just a matter of money: pay off the East Europeans so they will agree to migration restrictions and pay an acceptable fee to access the common market so the north European countries won't have to pick up the tab for the lost contribution to the EU-budget.

The real challenge I think will be to placate the Tory backbenchers.