Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35982851)

No sense of smell then. I never said I didn’t read the link, I just didn’t believe the story, big difference, so no whiff of hypocrisy here or in my posts.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 35982835)

The official Government leaflet is irrelevant. It was lawful, didn't breach any spending limits and was pretty ineffective. False equivalence.

Originally Posted by Mick (Post 35982853)

Says you?

Nope it isn’t. I’m right. Tax payer funded propaganda vs. Alleged over spending in one unofficial campaign. The referendum result isn’t illegitimate.

Originally Posted by Angua (Post 35982878)

The leaflet was a legal requirement of the Referendum spelling out both sides of the argument as per Venice Commission rules.

Sadly, whilst the UK government clearly embraced many of the principles of the Venice Commission code, these rules, in line with the advisory status of the referendum, aren’t legally binding, so the government is unfortunately at liberty to choose to ignore another highly relevant Venice Commission rule:

Which calls into question the whole legality of the referendum, let alone blithely carrying on regardless.

This is more for the benefit of other FMs.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35982820)

I don't see how Brexit helps these local factories though. We've already seen Nissan reduce their investment and even if you don't think Brexit was the prime motivation it's worth pointing out that it's now easier for them to trade with the EU from Japan than it is the UK. Adding tariffs to imports and exports is not going to encourage outside investment from outside the UK, we're not making this a cheaper country with which to do business until such a time that we make up all the existing trade access we've got now.

Dyson is an advocate of leaving but when it comes to business he isn't investing in post-Brexit Britain either.

People blamed the EU for globalisation (which obviously it is ultimately part of) but these are processes that are happening anyway.

If people were (rightly) angry at previous governments for letting these things happen then what will happen to those who sold Brexit as a way to revitalise British manufacturing? And when it comes down to it how confident are you that the governments of the future will focus on those industries as opposed to the banking sector when it comes to trade deals with the United States and the rest?

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35982820)

I don't see how Brexit helps these local factories though. We've already seen Nissan reduce their investment and even if you don't think Brexit was the prime motivation it's worth pointing out that it's now easier for them to trade with the EU from Japan than it is the UK. Adding tariffs to imports and exports is not going to encourage outside investment from outside the UK, we're not making this a cheaper country with which to do business until such a time that we make up all the existing trade access we've got now.

Dyson is an advocate of leaving but when it comes to business he isn't investing in post-Brexit Britain either.

People blamed the EU for globalisation (which obviously it is ultimately part of) but these are processes that are happening anyway.

If people were (rightly) angry at previous governments for letting these things happen then what will happen to those who sold Brexit as a way to revitalise British manufacturing? And when it comes down to it how confident are you that the governments of the future will focus on those industries as opposed to the banking sector when it comes to trade deals with the United States and the rest?

Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 35982899)

Why do peopykeep on thinking that the economy was a key factor in the result.............it wasn’t

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 35982918)

If instead of the Remain side saying that Sterling would fall, they said it would rise, then it would rise, instead of fall.


The markets follow the prediction, NOTHING ELSE. If the prediction is that it will fall, then they have to sell as quickly as they can to get the best price. Guess what happens when they sell? The price of Sterling goes down making it FALSELY look as though the prediction was right. It was the ANTICIPATION of a fall that created the fall. Not only that, but once the price has bottomed out, they can buy back Sterling at a LOWER price, thereby ending up with MORE money than they started out with.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35982914)

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35982914)

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35982928)

Can someone tell Mr Davis?

Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 35982928)

Can someone tell Mr Davis?

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35982919)

Sterling is not Bitcoin.

If this were true that sterling would have eventually recovered in the two years following the vote as people would think the underlying value of the currency is stronger than the speculators think. It didn't.

Speculation is only part of what drives currency and stock markets. There are other types of investors who make longer term bets and valuations of what they're buying. The currency market itself is also driven by the performance of the underlying economy and the companies within it, the economic policies of the central bank/government in charge of it and the confidence people have in the stability of the government.

It's hard to precisely value a currency, people a look more experienced than us find it hard to do, but it's just not all random speculation. Some of it is but those people do short term bets.