General Brexit discussion thread

[Baff]

Correct. London is the biggest of the 3 global financial hubs
The EU fincial sector is tiny. Insignificant globally.

The EU financial sector is massive, if London can't service it in January, depending on talks in the coming weeks and the EU isn't up to the task then New york or SIngapore will.

Yes, the EU banks may also have chosen to register in Singapore or the USA for access to those markets.
But for London, they didn't used to have to.
Now they do.

The EU financial sector is not massive. Sorry to disillusion you.
The two major European financial hubs, London and Geneva are not in the EU.

Certainly the EU demand for borrowing is massive.
But the EU's ability to acquire that funding is not present. They need access to the global markets for that.
And accessing the global markets is what London does best.


Germany has a big auto industry and a small banking industry.
Britain has a small auto industry and a big banking industry.

That you wish for the EU to be a bigger financial centre than the UK, does not make it so.
That I wish for the UK to be a bigger car producer than the EU, does not make it so.

It is what it is.

[Baff]

Good.
Then you will have no further complaints about us not being EU members.
Or following your political or diplomatic wishes for us.

You will in fact have become A-political.

If you have no wish to exercise control over others, you may even feel that voting is not for you.

[GerryT]

Correct. London is the biggest of the 3 global financial hubs
The EU fincial sector is tiny. Insignificant globally.

The EU financial sector is massive, if London can't service it in January, depending on talks in the coming weeks and the EU isn't up to the task then New york or SIngapore will.

[GerryT]

And we have just exercised that control.
You might note that this hasn't been easy to do but took about 30 years and almost didn't happen at all at multiple points over those decades.

No one can be blamed for no longer believing in democracy after all the crap we just went through to get out of a trade agreement that our establishment wished us to stay in.

So well done. You were right. We are in control.
Something you clearly wish that we were not and have done your best to prevent, I'll warrant.

When we say taking back control, we mean... taking back control from you.
And we have done so.

Not looking to control anyone, now you have that control back, do you plan on giving part of it away (new trade deals) or holding onto it.

[Baff]

You always were in control. .

And we have just exercised that control.
You might note that this hasn't been easy to do but took about 30 years and almost didn't happen at all at multiple points over those decades.

No one can be blamed for no longer believing in democracy after all the crap we just went through to get out of a trade agreement that our establishment wished us to stay in.

So well done. You were right. We are in control.
Something you clearly wish that we were not and have done your best to prevent, I'll warrant.

When we say taking back control, we mean... taking back control from you.
And we have done so.

[Baff]

They agreed to keep them temporairly.
The EU does not have the infrastructure to do it themselves.

Long term expect this business to move to the EU.

I agree the EU needs the expertise inhouse, but not the infrastructure, that's easily done. Getting the experienced people is the trick. But UK financial institutions have been moving to the EU, where they will register businesses, employ people, pay taxes. That's effectively migrating UK financial services from the UK to EU.

On the otherhand, it' s not all bad. Way more EU business has moved to the UK to stay inside UK passporting than has moved out of the UK to to stay inside EU passporting.

EU companies are moving to the UK to handle business they do within the UK, the rest they can handle via their home country.

This runs up the price of business for all those banks.
So they won't be pleased. But the lefties chasing all the tax revenues are going to love it.
At least... the UK ones are.

It doesn't run up costs, like UK companies these banks have to setup UK legal enties, effectively becoming UK banks paying takes and employing people in the UK. Boiler plating is not allowed in either jurisdiction.

I don't think the government has been quiet about this.
Rather the Remain dominated press has. It's been an egg on face moment for them.
Not the sort of story that fits with their narrative.

You have that backward, if the remain side had got these facts out prior to 2016 then brexit wouldn't have happened.
Remember the big red bus, all people saw was 350m a week coming back for the NHS. Little did they know the cost of brexit would be far in excess of what the UK paid into the UK.
If the remain said had a big blue bus saying, Stay in the UK and we can fund the NHS, and we have always had full control.

Correct. London is the biggest of the 3 global financial hubs
The EU financial sector is tiny. Insignificant globally.
Having 500 million people or the worlds biggest blah blah blah. Doesn't count for dick.
If you want to be at the centre of finance, if you want to be in that global market you need access to either London, New York or Singapore's markets.
None of which are in the EU.

So EU finance companies have had to register in the UK to do business here, where before they did not need to.
The Numpty Squad were telling you that the EU was the most important financial sector.  That London needed them. They could not have been further from the truth if they tried.


It runs up costs to have to have an HQ registered in multiple jurisdictions where before you only needed the one.
For a bank like HSBC who already has operations in miost countries, this isn't an issue.
But for a small national bank who only has premsises in their host country. This is.
They now need to domocile in the UK too in order to be able to raise funds on the London market.
(Which is the globallly central market where all the funds have availability).



The EU can build it's own passporting infrastructure and can be expected to do so.
Because it has not done so it is continuing with the current arrangements out of expediency.
I do not expect this to be an indefinite arrangement.

[papasmurf]

And I like the Russians.

I suggest you emigrate there then.

[Baff]

CANZUK.
In WW2, while the Germans were trying to kill us, they sent us food, men, guns and ammunition for cost or for free.
I want this trade deal. I have an honour debt to these people that EEC membership betrayed.
The EU brings much shame upon me.

If you are going to raise the spectre of WW2 and ask me to make a loyalty call between Germany, Ireland and the USA.....  that's a no brainer.

I choose the ones who haven't ever bombed me. The ones who didn't threaten to enslave my family or try to kill any of us.

Think about what your saying.
The USA didn't want to send troops, their plan was to profit off the back of the UK by selling equipment, when the UK ran out of money USA started to lease equipment to UK, after the war it sold the leased equipment to UK as it had none left. It was a financial arrangement, a profitable one, with Interest. This profitable business lifter the USA out of the great depression and set it up to being the superpower it is today. Did you know from 1943 the USA were producing 4 times the amount of military product than Germany.
Only for pearl harbour we won't know if the USA would have got involve, it certainly wasn't to help their UK or French buddies. And when it came to Dunkirk only for the 40,000 French first army gave their lives to delay the Germans very few if any would have got off the beach. But if you feel like you owe a country something the French would be on the top part of the list, as would the Russians, they pretty much defeated Hitler, their price was heavy, 11m military deaths and a further 15m civilians but they did take out 3/4 of the Germany armies.

Dunkirk?

Where we tried to save France but failed?
Nice of the French to turn up to their own country to defend it.
Big help.

I'm not on Germany's side in WW2.
Forget it.

And I like the Russians. They are anti EU too.
In fact pretty much the whole world dislikes it. Including half of it's "citizens".

[GerryT]

I quite like them all ,in fact I had  grandparents that were two out of the three . But its never been about people or Nation states its always been about not being in control of our own destiny .
Speaking of which it doesn't look like there has been much progress on the sticking points . After being told no a thousand times Barmier is still after a fish supper and Macron wants ,I dont know he always wants something .
Unless they do the usual work through the night gig and come to terms in time for a lobster breakfast on the last day   its going to be no deal  and get on with it .

You always were in control. The UK decided to Join the then EEC and continued to decide to be a member, until it didn't and it left. That's been in control.
But if what you want is to not have anyone have a say in what you do then you have a massive problem, because every trade deal you sign will involve agreeing ABC which ties you down and restricts the options you have at a future date. Getting out of those deals could be harder than getting out of the EU, so if being a member of the EU was your idea of losing sovereignty then the future is looking like you will lose far greater sovereignty.

Progress does look stalled, probably going backward. But I disagree about the working through the night. That has only applied to member states and internal EU deals, the UK is no longer a member, most EU states are now preparing for no deal as that's the most likely outcome.
Barnier want's access for exports, fishing is a tiny percentage of that. It's just a pawn, build up fishing that's worth nothing in exchange for getting something important, Frost can declare that he's battered the EU and defeated them in the trade talks as Fishing is kept at home. He know's the UK public see fishing as a big thing.

[Streetwalker]

Who do you like, the frogs, the paddies or the Germans. The USA got you to pay for their kit in WW2, that bill was eventually paid off in 2006 and under trump their waiting to pounce. SO who do you like ?

I quite like them all ,in fact I had  grandparents that were two out of the three . But its never been about people or Nation states its always been about not being in control of our own destiny .
Speaking of which it doesn't look like there has been much progress on the sticking points . After being told no a thousand times Barmier is still after a fish supper and Macron wants ,I dont know he always wants something .
Unless they do the usual work through the night gig and come to terms in time for a lobster breakfast on the last day   its going to be no deal  and get on with it .

[GerryT]

They agreed to keep them temporairly.
The EU does not have the infrastructure to do it themselves.

Long term expect this business to move to the EU.

I agree the EU needs the expertise inhouse, but not the infrastructure, that's easily done. Getting the experienced people is the trick. But UK financial institutions have been moving to the EU, where they will register businesses, employ people, pay taxes. That's effectively migrating UK financial services from the UK to EU.

On the otherhand, it' s not all bad. Way more EU business has moved to the UK to stay inside UK passporting than has moved out of the UK to to stay inside EU passporting.

EU companies are moving to the UK to handle business they do within the UK, the rest they can handle via their home country.

This runs up the price of business for all those banks.
So they won't be pleased. But the lefties chasing all the tax revenues are going to love it.
At least... the UK ones are.

It doesn't run up costs, like UK companies these banks have to setup UK legal enties, effectively becoming UK banks paying takes and employing people in the UK. Boiler plating is not allowed in either jurisdiction.

I don't think the government has been quiet about this.
Rather the Remain dominated press has. It's been an egg on face moment for them.
Not the sort of story that fits with their narrative.

You have that backward, if the remain side had got these facts out prior to 2016 then brexit wouldn't have happened.
Remember the big red bus, all people saw was 350m a week coming back for the NHS. Little did they know the cost of brexit would be far in excess of what the UK paid into the UK.
If the remain said had a big blue bus saying, Stay in the UK and we can fund the NHS, and we have always had full control.

[Sheepy]

Rumours are ladies, the Tories are gaining even more votes since telling the EU, they can do one.

[papasmurf]

I'm surprised there isn't more debate on this subject, and I mean in depth debate.

So am I, all I can find is comment on financial institution and related sites, basically they seem to be terrified wondering why the government is doing nothing.

[GerryT]

There has been a total silence from the government about passported financial transactions. It is a serious worry and not just for business.

I'm surprised there isn't more debate on this subject, and I mean in depth debate. I always seemed to me the British people were swayed with jingoism's and catch phrases on a pile of lies.  The hard questions haven't been asked and until they are the politicians will continue business as usual.

[GerryT]

CANZUK.
In WW2, while the Germans were trying to kill us, they sent us food, men, guns and ammunition for cost or for free.
I want this trade deal. I have an honour debt to these people that EEC membership betrayed.
The EU brings much shame upon me.

If you are going to raise the spectre of WW2 and ask me to make a loyalty call between Germany, Ireland and the USA.....  that's a no brainer.

I choose the ones who haven't ever bombed me. The ones who didn't threaten to enslave my family or try to kill any of us.

Think about what your saying.
The USA didn't want to send troops, their plan was to profit off the back of the UK by selling equipment, when the UK ran out of money USA started to lease equipment to UK, after the war it sold the leased equipment to UK as it had none left. It was a financial arrangement, a profitable one, with Interest. This profitable business lifter the USA out of the great depression and set it up to being the superpower it is today. Did you know from 1943 the USA were producing 4 times the amount of military product than Germany.
Only for pearl harbour we won't know if the USA would have got involve, it certainly wasn't to help their UK or French buddies. And when it came to Dunkirk only for the 40,000 French first army gave their lives to delay the Germans very few if any would have got off the beach. But if you feel like you owe a country something the French would be on the top part of the list, as would the Russians, they pretty much defeated Hitler, their price was heavy, 11m military deaths and a further 15m civilians but they did take out 3/4 of the Germany armies.