Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 35874927)

Gawd, how many more pages and pages of reassurance do you need? Everything is going to be alright. Really. Honestly. We wouldn't lie to you. We are red, white and blue all the way through.

Have a lay down in a darkened room for a couple of years and when you come out all the big worrisome problems will be sorted out. Ok? :p:

Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 35874927)

Gawd, how many more pages and pages of reassurance do you need? Everything is going to be alright. Really. Honestly. We wouldn't lie to you. We are red, white and blue all the way through.

Have a lay down in a darkened room for a couple of years and when you come out all the big worrisome problems will be sorted out. Ok? :p:

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35874924)

London is major global financial centre linked to another Global financial centre, New York, directly by several trans-Atlantic fibre cables.

Latency across this link is a major issue, and one which drove the installation of new cable a couple of years ago. there is in excess of £9 billion worth of financial transactions of all kinds done every day between these to centres.

IF you move to Frankfurt, Paris, or mostly anywhere on continental Europe you are extending the distance to New York and therefore putting yourself at a disadvantage.

THe only way there would be a mass exodus of financial companies out of London is if everybody did it at the same time, and then there would be the speculators that would stay.

Chances are you will see the rise of a European financial hub, probably Frankfurt, that will be the main trader with London and other Global Hubs but London will remain as a "Global" financial hub.

Originally Posted by Ramrod (Post 35874955)

(iirc) The other point in favour of London remaining a major financial hub is the issue of time zones. London is perfectly situated to deal with both the far east and the usa.......as one goes to sleep the other wakes up......and we are in the middle.

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 35874970)

And now it may move to Ireland.



It will be interesting to see if remainers are willing to put their money where their mouth is. Then again certain busnisses may fund it.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016...MCNEWEML6619I2

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35874950)

So, the same politicians that nobody believed when they talked about other things, and were calling lying crooks who only were bothered about their own self-interest, are now suddenly trustworthy?

OK then....

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35874954)

Nice post but regrettably nothing to do with the post you chose to quote. If you revisit my post, you will see it's about how much/how little of the City of London will have to move to the EU and the timescale in which this will have to happen.

Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 35875024)

Politicians will be aware that their accountability will increase as a consequence of our regained sovereingty. It's up to us to keep them in line ;).

Originally Posted by Kursk (Post 35875024)

I quoted your latest post as a means to engage you: the theme of your posting is of Brexit being wholly negative and, with respect, that is self-defeating given the inevitability of our EU departure.

Sorry, I was a little rude :).

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35875026)

Will you now step up and keep our politicians in line alongside Gina Miller, Deir Dos Santos, Grahame Pigney? Or will you be happy to look the other way and hand our politicians a blank cheque to do as they wish with regard to our future relationship with the EU?

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35875026)

Will you now step up and keep our politicians in line alongside Gina Miller, Deir Dos Santos, Grahame Pigney? Or will you be happy to look the other way and hand our politicians a blank cheque to do as they wish with regard to our future relationship with the EU?

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35875028)

It is precisely because in the past that politicians had "blank cheque" about the EU that people voted to leave. If we stayed in the EU they would still have that "blank cheque". So why is that "blank cheque" now supposedly not to be used to leave the EU?

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35875028)

It is precisely because in the past that politicians had "blank cheque" about the EU that people voted to leave. If we stayed in the EU they would still have that "blank cheque". So why is that "blank cheque" now supposedly not to be used to leave the EU?

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35875037)

If we assumed that the first part of your statement is correct, two wrongs don't make a right. If you believed that there was insufficient scrutiny before, then why accept that now?

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35875038)

Because of the problems it has caused .As Kursk said our MP's will now be more accountable so it's up to us to make sure they know that .It's ok voting to leave but we can't just sit back thinking the job is done ,it's up to the Gina Millers of the world to ensure our politicians do as we want

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35875039)

The point is that the same people who thought it ok to have a "blank cheque" and are happy with what it brought, would still be happy with a "blank cheque" as long as things were done THEIR way.