FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > London will remain Europe's Number 1 financial centre after Brexit, says German Banking Boss
London will remain Europe's Number 1 financial centre after Brexit, says German Banking Boss
Jump to: Newest in thread
Germany's banking boss, Bundesbank leader Andreas Dombret says London will remain Europe's main financial hub after Brexit. He said in a BBC radio 4 interview 2 days ago that London will continue to beat Frankfurt, Paris, Amsterdam and Dublin to remain the number 1 financial centre in Europe after Brexit. Despite attempts by Germany, France, Ireland and Holland to lure bankers away from London, he said, "There is widespread reluctance of bankers living in London to move abroad".
Yet another scaremongering prediction of the remain campaign goes down the tubes, as they predicted banks would move out of London if the country voted to leave the EU.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5603863/Germany-bank-boss-says-London-remain-financial-hub-post-Brexit.html |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
That is so good to know...
And such an authoritative source, it's not as if we have had recent experience of banksters lying in order to perpetuate a global fraud that nearly destroyed the world economy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"Germany's banking boss, Bundesbank leader Andreas Dombret says London will remain Europe's main financial hub after Brexit. He said in a BBC radio 4 interview 2 days ago that London will continue to beat Frankfurt, Paris, Amsterdam and Dublin to remain the number 1 financial centre in Europe after Brexit. Despite attempts by Germany, France, Ireland and Holland to lure bankers away from London, he said, "There is widespread reluctance of bankers living in London to move abroad".
Yet another scaremongering prediction of the remain campaign goes down the tubes, as they predicted banks would move out of London if the country voted to leave the EU.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5603863/Germany-bank-boss-says-London-remain-financial-hub-post-Brexit.html "
that is great.... but that was never the point that the "remainers" and the city of london were and are making...
the point they were making is that it would be the UK would lose the "EU financial passport"... which means that Some job would have to leave the UK and would have to be moved because those functions would have to be done in EU countries...
no one ever said all the jobs would go..... people estimate that the job losses that would have to be moved outside the EU was approx 10-20000 jobs, and that looks like a sensible estimate based on what has been announced by financial institutions so far....
so what you basically said was "yey.... bye those jobs, we still no.1!!!" which seems a silly thing to cheer peoples livelyhoods being lost...... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
They seam to have changed the prediction slightly ,
It's only between 4,000 and 5,000
Job to move ,
It's not to bad out of 345,000 employed in financial services in london , |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"The UK hasn’t left the EU. Yet.
what part of "after brexit" did you not pick up on  "
Everyone is peering into the looking glass, trying to predict the future. It's a mugs game.
Perhaps this geezer could give me some lotto numbers for tonight.
The only informed judgement you can make about Brexit is when it happens. I don't think anyone can say with confidence what it will look like in 12, 24 or 48 months from now.
Why?
Because it is Brexit for the blind.
Normally, when there is a big constitutional change, you do so on the basis of a plan showing what you want to achieve and what it means.
We're making it up as we go along.
At least in the Scottish referendum the nationalists set out a White Paper beforehand that gave people a clue about what the future might look like.
Brexit was done blind. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"Germany's banking boss, Bundesbank leader Andreas Dombret says London will remain Europe's main financial hub after Brexit. He said in a BBC radio 4 interview 2 days ago that London will continue to beat Frankfurt, Paris, Amsterdam and Dublin to remain the number 1 financial centre in Europe after Brexit. Despite attempts by Germany, France, Ireland and Holland to lure bankers away from London, he said, "There is widespread reluctance of bankers living in London to move abroad".
Yet another scaremongering prediction of the remain campaign goes down the tubes, as they predicted banks would move out of London if the country voted to leave the EU.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5603863/Germany-bank-boss-says-London-remain-financial-hub-post-Brexit.html
that is great.... but that was never the point that the "remainers" and the city of london were and are making...
the point they were making is that it would be the UK would lose the "EU financial passport"... which means that Some job would have to leave the UK and would have to be moved because those functions would have to be done in EU countries...
no one ever said all the jobs would go..... people estimate that the job losses that would have to be moved outside the EU was approx 10-20000 jobs, and that looks like a sensible estimate based on what has been announced by financial institutions so far....
so what you basically said was "yey.... bye those jobs, we still no.1!!!" which seems a silly thing to cheer peoples livelyhoods being lost......"
On May 9 2016
Xavier Rolet, chief executive of the London Stock Exchange, has said that as many as 100,000 City jobs could be lost if Britain left the EU in a private meeting with David Cameron, linked to moving the clearing of euro-denominated securities out of London.
George Osborne has warned of “tens of thousands” of potential job losses in the financial services industry if Britain leaves the EU, claiming that 285,000 jobs in the sector are linked to business with Europe.
Mr Osborne’s estimates were based on a new Treasury analysis showing around 100,000 financial services jobs were directly linked to EU exports
So the prediction was not 10-20,000...it was 100,000.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"That is so good to know...
And such an authoritative source, it's not as if we have had recent experience of banksters lying in order to perpetuate a global fraud that nearly destroyed the world economy."
Wasn't it mainly banking and treasury forecasts that the remain campaign was based upon? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmessMan
over a year ago
yumsville |
Frankfurt are putting 18m Euro into remodelling their old stock exchange and I think 100 major banks have repositioned to Frankfurt already with 1000 smaller still to announce any contingency plans. London will no doubt remain a huge player as; it is London. But, Brexit will impact there are obvious moves being made.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-deutsche-boerse-renovation/deutsche-boerse-to-invest-23-million-to-renovate-frankfurts-old-stock-exchange-idUKKBN1FI17B
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
Who knows,just another so called expert,we do not know.Hope he is right but he is just another guesser not a phycic.No such thing as an expert on what will happen as this is a new event no great nation has ever left the EU before
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"So the financial companies are moving to 4 seperate hubs and we're surprised that no single one of these is racing ahead?
Is London going to be weaker thanks to Brexit? Still, yes."
But you said there would be a minimum of 100,000 jobs lost in the city because of Brexit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So the financial companies are moving to 4 seperate hubs and we're surprised that no single one of these is racing ahead?
Is London going to be weaker thanks to Brexit? Still, yes.
But you said there would be a minimum of 100,000 jobs lost in the city because of Brexit. "
Are you now saying it's only going to 4,000 or 5,000?
On what do you base that?
This seems to me a bit like claiming a victory when actually all you've got is another prediction which basically is saying London WILL be worse off after BREXIT but it might not be as bad as first feared and it will probably still be bigger than its main rivals.
Not really great news, is it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So the financial companies are moving to 4 seperate hubs and we're surprised that no single one of these is racing ahead?
Is London going to be weaker thanks to Brexit? Still, yes.
But you said there would be a minimum of 100,000 jobs lost in the city because of Brexit. "
Over time the losses will be in the tens of thousands. What we're missing here is that Euro clearing will definitely be moved from London and that in its own will be one of the biggest hits to jobs. Theres also the jobs these places support (print,IT, canteen and janitorial staff etc.) which arent factored in. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmessMan
over a year ago
yumsville |
"So the financial companies are moving to 4 seperate hubs and we're surprised that no single one of these is racing ahead?
Is London going to be weaker thanks to Brexit? Still, yes.
But you said there would be a minimum of 100,000 jobs lost in the city because of Brexit.
Over time the losses will be in the tens of thousands. What we're missing here is that Euro clearing will definitely be moved from London and that in its own will be one of the biggest hits to jobs. Theres also the jobs these places support (print,IT, canteen and janitorial staff etc.) which arent factored in."
How will the Frankfurt ever challenge the London stock exchange in any near future? There are are trillions of pounds flowing through it daily, with tens of thousands of companies listed on it. It wasn't set up in a few years. Brexit would have to be a complete and utter disaster and the UK economy would have to collapse along with all of its IT infrastructure for that to happen. It's a little unrealistic. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"So the financial companies are moving to 4 seperate hubs and we're surprised that no single one of these is racing ahead?
Is London going to be weaker thanks to Brexit? Still, yes.
But you said there would be a minimum of 100,000 jobs lost in the city because of Brexit.
Over time the losses will be in the tens of thousands. What we're missing here is that Euro clearing will definitely be moved from London and that in its own will be one of the biggest hits to jobs. Theres also the jobs these places support (print,IT, canteen and janitorial staff etc.) which arent factored in."
So in the tens of thousands 'over time', not the 'minimum 100,000 by 2019' which you previously stated. Plus the latest prediction is 4-5,000. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"So the financial companies are moving to 4 seperate hubs and we're surprised that no single one of these is racing ahead?
Is London going to be weaker thanks to Brexit? Still, yes.
But you said there would be a minimum of 100,000 jobs lost in the city because of Brexit.
Are you now saying it's only going to 4,000 or 5,000?
On what do you base that?
This seems to me a bit like claiming a victory when actually all you've got is another prediction which basically is saying London WILL be worse off after BREXIT but it might not be as bad as first feared and it will probably still be bigger than its main rivals.
Not really great news, is it?"
4-5,000 is the latest prediction.
Not the 'minimum 100,000 by 2019' that remainers predicted.
So instead of 10% of the employees in the city finance sector, it's 0.4%.
And now measure that against the million extra jobs created since the brexit vote, and you'll maybe get some idea about how taken in remainers were.
The million extra jobs takes in the 800,000 extra jobless was predicted by the remain campaign that there would be by now 'immediately following a vote to leave'.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So the financial companies are moving to 4 seperate hubs and we're surprised that no single one of these is racing ahead?
Is London going to be weaker thanks to Brexit? Still, yes.
But you said there would be a minimum of 100,000 jobs lost in the city because of Brexit.
Over time the losses will be in the tens of thousands. What we're missing here is that Euro clearing will definitely be moved from London and that in its own will be one of the biggest hits to jobs. Theres also the jobs these places support (print,IT, canteen and janitorial staff etc.) which arent factored in.
So in the tens of thousands 'over time', not the 'minimum 100,000 by 2019' which you previously stated. Plus the latest prediction is 4-5,000."
At no point did I say "by 2019" when at that stage we didnt even know how long the transition would be. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So the financial companies are moving to 4 seperate hubs and we're surprised that no single one of these is racing ahead?
Is London going to be weaker thanks to Brexit? Still, yes.
But you said there would be a minimum of 100,000 jobs lost in the city because of Brexit.
Are you now saying it's only going to 4,000 or 5,000?
On what do you base that?
This seems to me a bit like claiming a victory when actually all you've got is another prediction which basically is saying London WILL be worse off after BREXIT but it might not be as bad as first feared and it will probably still be bigger than its main rivals.
Not really great news, is it?
4-5,000 is the latest prediction.
Not the 'minimum 100,000 by 2019' that remainers predicted.
So instead of 10% of the employees in the city finance sector, it's 0.4%.
And now measure that against the million extra jobs created since the brexit vote, and you'll maybe get some idea about how taken in remainers were.
The million extra jobs takes in the 800,000 extra jobless was predicted by the remain campaign that there would be by now 'immediately following a vote to leave'.
"
And the value of real wages has dropped significantly as part time jobs replace full time and low paying jobs replace high paying jobs.
And 4 - 5000 is not the figure. Theres more jobs than that coming to Dublin alone in plans that have already been announced. Much like with the Tories announcement of a divorce bill that ignores huge payments for PR purposes so to are companies downplaying job losses ( as companies will do regardless of the reason). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
" At no point did I say "by 2019" when at that stage we didnt even know how long the transition would be."
This thread you started some time ago;
EU draft law to remove Euro clearing from UK; minimum 100,000 job losses
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
" At no point did I say "by 2019" when at that stage we didnt even know how long the transition would be.
This thread you started some time ago;
EU draft law to remove Euro clearing from UK; minimum 100,000 job losses
"
And this is what you said:
By 2019 the entire operation will be moved from the UK at a cost of at least a minimum of 100,000 British jobs that depend on the industry |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"At no point did I say "by 2019" when at that stage we didnt even know how long the transition would be."
As already pointed out...you did say 'by 2019'.
https://m.fabswingers.com/forum/politics/646699 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"At no point did I say "by 2019" when at that stage we didnt even know how long the transition would be.
As already pointed out...you did say 'by 2019'.
https://m.fabswingers.com/forum/politics/646699"
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So the financial companies are moving to 4 seperate hubs and we're surprised that no single one of these is racing ahead?
Is London going to be weaker thanks to Brexit? Still, yes.
But you said there would be a minimum of 100,000 jobs lost in the city because of Brexit.
Are you now saying it's only going to 4,000 or 5,000?
On what do you base that?
This seems to me a bit like claiming a victory when actually all you've got is another prediction which basically is saying London WILL be worse off after BREXIT but it might not be as bad as first feared and it will probably still be bigger than its main rivals.
Not really great news, is it?
4-5,000 is the latest prediction.
Not the 'minimum 100,000 by 2019' that remainers predicted.
So instead of 10% of the employees in the city finance sector, it's 0.4%.
And now measure that against the million extra jobs created since the brexit vote, and you'll maybe get some idea about how taken in remainers were.
The million extra jobs takes in the 800,000 extra jobless was predicted by the remain campaign that there would be by now 'immediately following a vote to leave'.
And the value of real wages has dropped significantly as part time jobs replace full time and low paying jobs replace high paying jobs.
And 4 - 5000 is not the figure. Theres more jobs than that coming to Dublin alone in plans that have already been announced. Much like with the Tories announcement of a divorce bill that ignores huge payments for PR purposes so to are companies downplaying job losses ( as companies will do regardless of the reason)."
Actually the latest wage versus inflation figures shows that average wages in the UK have risen above the rate of inflation.
Also you keep talking about this mystery figure on top of the official £37 billion divorce bill that only you seem to know about and has not been quoted anywhere in the media or the press at the same time you ignore payments to EU institutions from UK households which pushes the UK contribution fee up higher (as quoted by the ONS), when you tried to make out we don't pay much in contribution fees on another thread, when the UK is one of the highest net contributors to the current EU budget. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" At no point did I say "by 2019" when at that stage we didnt even know how long the transition would be.
This thread you started some time ago;
EU draft law to remove Euro clearing from UK; minimum 100,000 job losses
And this is what you said:
By 2019 the entire operation will be moved from the UK at a cost of at least a minimum of 100,000 British jobs that depend on the industry"
So a slightly more accurate version is "You quoted from the 2 articles you linked to which said 2019"? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Actually the latest wage versus inflation figures shows that average wages in the UK have risen above the rate of inflation.
Also you keep talking about this mystery figure on top of the official £37 billion divorce bill that only you seem to know about and has not been quoted anywhere in the media or the press at the same time you ignore payments to EU institutions from UK households which pushes the UK contribution fee up higher (as quoted by the ONS), when you tried to make out we don't pay much in contribution fees on another thread, when the UK is one of the highest net contributors to the current EU budget. "
Well just one of the items left off the Torys estimate were contingent liabilities which were 11bn.
In their estimate the Tories also made an assumption that EU projects will be cancelled at a far higher rate than usual (actual rate 4.6%, Treasury estimate 6-8%) and offered no reason for this.
The Treasury also used a more favourable discount rate when calculating pensions without any underlying reason.
But you already know this because Ive already explained it to you twice since the deal was done  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
" At no point did I say "by 2019" when at that stage we didnt even know how long the transition would be.
This thread you started some time ago;
EU draft law to remove Euro clearing from UK; minimum 100,000 job losses
And this is what you said:
By 2019 the entire operation will be moved from the UK at a cost of at least a minimum of 100,000 British jobs that depend on the industry
So a slightly more accurate version is "You quoted from the 2 articles you linked to which said 2019"?"
Splitting hairs methinks! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
" At no point did I say "by 2019" when at that stage we didnt even know how long the transition would be.
This thread you started some time ago;
EU draft law to remove Euro clearing from UK; minimum 100,000 job losses
And this is what you said:
By 2019 the entire operation will be moved from the UK at a cost of at least a minimum of 100,000 British jobs that depend on the industry
So a slightly more accurate version is "You quoted from the 2 articles you linked to which said 2019"?"
And at no time did you say you didn't believe it, that the numbers couldn't be right.
So what you're saying is you were quoting numbers that you didn't believe, that you didn't point out that they could not be accurate, and that you were just basically trying to stir shit and promote sscaremongering to fit in with your anti-brexit, anti-UK rhetoric?
But nevertheless, you DID say "by 2019". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
" At no point did I say "by 2019" when at that stage we didnt even know how long the transition would be.
This thread you started some time ago;
EU draft law to remove Euro clearing from UK; minimum 100,000 job losses
And this is what you said:
By 2019 the entire operation will be moved from the UK at a cost of at least a minimum of 100,000 British jobs that depend on the industry
So a slightly more accurate version is "You quoted from the 2 articles you linked to which said 2019"?"
And at no point in that thread did you say anything like;
They can't say that because they don't even know how long the transition will be.
You wrote it as fact...and then said words like, "they couldn't say they weren't warned".
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"Actually the latest wage versus inflation figures shows that average wages in the UK have risen above the rate of inflation.
Also you keep talking about this mystery figure on top of the official £37 billion divorce bill that only you seem to know about and has not been quoted anywhere in the media or the press at the same time you ignore payments to EU institutions from UK households which pushes the UK contribution fee up higher (as quoted by the ONS), when you tried to make out we don't pay much in contribution fees on another thread, when the UK is one of the highest net contributors to the current EU budget.
Well just one of the items left off the Torys estimate were contingent liabilities which were 11bn.
In their estimate the Tories also made an assumption that EU projects will be cancelled at a far higher rate than usual (actual rate 4.6%, Treasury estimate 6-8%) and offered no reason for this.
The Treasury also used a more favourable discount rate when calculating pensions without any underlying reason.
But you already know this because Ive already explained it to you twice since the deal was done "
And which of these do you think are facts, are true, or are you just quoting what you've seen elsewhere? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Of course we still will still trade with the EU. We will also start doing well trading more with other wealthy contries like middle east, china, USA etc etc... its just common sense..
The remain campaign are trying to get a second ref.. Would he leave campaign be debating/moaning much if we voted to stay... we need to get the best deal and stop this moaning and negotivity.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Of course we still will still trade with the EU. We will also start doing well trading more with other wealthy contries like middle east, china, USA etc etc... its just common sense..
The remain campaign are trying to get a second ref.. Would he leave campaign be debating/moaning much if we voted to stay... we need to get the best deal and stop this moaning and negotivity.. "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Of course we still will still trade with the EU. We will also start doing well trading more with other wealthy contries like middle east, china, USA etc etc... its just common sense..
The remain campaign are trying to get a second ref.. Would he leave campaign be debating/moaning much if we voted to stay... we need to get the best deal and stop this moaning and negotivity.. "
An excellent post . We will be getting the best of both worlds. Trade with both the EU and the other countries which you mention. Common sense is a bit lacking with s some posters on here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Actually the latest wage versus inflation figures shows that average wages in the UK have risen above the rate of inflation.
Also you keep talking about this mystery figure on top of the official £37 billion divorce bill that only you seem to know about and has not been quoted anywhere in the media or the press at the same time you ignore payments to EU institutions from UK households which pushes the UK contribution fee up higher (as quoted by the ONS), when you tried to make out we don't pay much in contribution fees on another thread, when the UK is one of the highest net contributors to the current EU budget.
Well just one of the items left off the Torys estimate were contingent liabilities which were 11bn.
In their estimate the Tories also made an assumption that EU projects will be cancelled at a far higher rate than usual (actual rate 4.6%, Treasury estimate 6-8%) and offered no reason for this.
The Treasury also used a more favourable discount rate when calculating pensions without any underlying reason.
But you already know this because Ive already explained it to you twice since the deal was done
And which of these do you think are facts, are true, or are you just quoting what you've seen elsewhere?"
Starting a thread is starting a discussion. You put out the news you want to discuss and take it from there. Is it possible that the Euro clearing will be gone by 2019, yes. Will that lead to a huge amount of high paying jobs going? Yes. Will there be supporting jobs in those companies and there suppliers going? Yes. Will it be tens of thousands of jobs, looks very, very likely. Will it be exactly 100,000 on December 31st 2019, not sure.
The difference between this item (euro clearing) and the divorce bill is huge. The euro clearing is about something thats expected to happen in the near future. The divorce bill on the other hand is something thats been published. You'll notice that no one is, or has, challenged the fact that the Tories completely left out the contingent liabilities from their workings. No one has said that the divergence from the normal basis of working these figures out is justified (pensions discount and project cancellations).
If you want to discuss either or both the divorce bill or the job losses stemming from the loss of Euro clearing then I am absolutely happy to do that provided of course that you can bring correct information to the table and put up a coherent argument against the facts.
When Centaur keeps saying that the divorce bill is 38bn and its been reported by newspapers and tv news I can easily point out that they were reporting on the Tory published estimate and I can point to why the 38bn is wrong (again; contingent liabilities being completely left out, the pensions discount not matching any formula the Treasury or EU has used before and the Tories anticipating that eu project cancellations will for no reason suddenly almost double.)
If you can point to anything of substance that proves me wrong on the divorce bill or that shows a significant difference from the estimates regarding job losses on euro clearing then Im ready to have my mind changed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Of course we still will still trade with the EU. We will also start doing well trading more with other wealthy contries like middle east, china, USA etc etc... its just common sense..
The remain campaign are trying to get a second ref.. Would he leave campaign be debating/moaning much if we voted to stay... we need to get the best deal and stop this moaning and negotivity.. "
Yes you will still trade with the EU but answer me this:
British beef and French beef are currently retailing in Paris for about the same price.
If there are tariffs added to British beef coming into the EU this will increase the price. (In a no deal situation where we revert to WTO terms that means €3 per kg plus 12.8% of the value. That roughly works out to 65% increase.)
Now,explain to me why the people of Paris are suddenly going to spend an extra 65% to get beef from Britain instead of paying the normal price for beef from their own country?
And if for some reason you think French people desire British beef so much that they would pay a 65% premium why arent they already charging that? Are British farmers so bad at business that theyre leaving billions on the table each year? Because I very much doubt it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Actually the latest wage versus inflation figures shows that average wages in the UK have risen above the rate of inflation.
Also you keep talking about this mystery figure on top of the official £37 billion divorce bill that only you seem to know about and has not been quoted anywhere in the media or the press at the same time you ignore payments to EU institutions from UK households which pushes the UK contribution fee up higher (as quoted by the ONS), when you tried to make out we don't pay much in contribution fees on another thread, when the UK is one of the highest net contributors to the current EU budget.
Well just one of the items left off the Torys estimate were contingent liabilities which were 11bn.
In their estimate the Tories also made an assumption that EU projects will be cancelled at a far higher rate than usual (actual rate 4.6%, Treasury estimate 6-8%) and offered no reason for this.
The Treasury also used a more favourable discount rate when calculating pensions without any underlying reason.
But you already know this because Ive already explained it to you twice since the deal was done
And which of these do you think are facts, are true, or are you just quoting what you've seen elsewhere?
Starting a thread is starting a discussion. You put out the news you want to discuss and take it from there. Is it possible that the Euro clearing will be gone by 2019, yes. Will that lead to a huge amount of high paying jobs going? Yes. Will there be supporting jobs in those companies and there suppliers going? Yes. Will it be tens of thousands of jobs, looks very, very likely. Will it be exactly 100,000 on December 31st 2019, not sure.
The difference between this item (euro clearing) and the divorce bill is huge. The euro clearing is about something thats expected to happen in the near future. The divorce bill on the other hand is something thats been published. You'll notice that no one is, or has, challenged the fact that the Tories completely left out the contingent liabilities from their workings. No one has said that the divergence from the normal basis of working these figures out is justified (pensions discount and project cancellations).
If you want to discuss either or both the divorce bill or the job losses stemming from the loss of Euro clearing then I am absolutely happy to do that provided of course that you can bring correct information to the table and put up a coherent argument against the facts.
When Centaur keeps saying that the divorce bill is 38bn and its been reported by newspapers and tv news I can easily point out that they were reporting on the Tory published estimate and I can point to why the 38bn is wrong (again; contingent liabilities being completely left out, the pensions discount not matching any formula the Treasury or EU has used before and the Tories anticipating that eu project cancellations will for no reason suddenly almost double.)
If you can point to anything of substance that proves me wrong on the divorce bill or that shows a significant difference from the estimates regarding job losses on euro clearing then Im ready to have my mind changed."
You've done it again, added an extra billion on thinking no one will notice and you've quoted £38 billion as the official divorce bill. After the last round of talks at the EU all the press and media quoted the official divorce bill as £37 billion, NOT the £38 billion you quoted. You also never quote any links to the extra you keep claiming is going on top. Why is that? Maybe because they don't exist?
You also say it's Tory estimate, but of course the EU also published the £37 billion divorce bill figure in their own papers and it's also been quoted by Barnier himself.
As for the changes to job losses that has been established in the OP on this thread, where the German banking boss said there is widespread reluctance of bankers to leave London and move abroad (also backed up with a link which you've failed to do). It's obvious based on his statement that the figure will now be lower than you and other remainers predicted during and after the referendum campaign.
You've also said you didn't say it would happen by 2019, then you've been proved wrong with a link to a thread which proves you did in fact say it! Honestly your credibility has been completely shot to pieces in this thread, you really should put the shovel down now and stop digging that hole for yourself. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"Actually the latest wage versus inflation figures shows that average wages in the UK have risen above the rate of inflation.
Also you keep talking about this mystery figure on top of the official £37 billion divorce bill that only you seem to know about and has not been quoted anywhere in the media or the press at the same time you ignore payments to EU institutions from UK households which pushes the UK contribution fee up higher (as quoted by the ONS), when you tried to make out we don't pay much in contribution fees on another thread, when the UK is one of the highest net contributors to the current EU budget.
Well just one of the items left off the Torys estimate were contingent liabilities which were 11bn.
In their estimate the Tories also made an assumption that EU projects will be cancelled at a far higher rate than usual (actual rate 4.6%, Treasury estimate 6-8%) and offered no reason for this.
The Treasury also used a more favourable discount rate when calculating pensions without any underlying reason.
But you already know this because Ive already explained it to you twice since the deal was done
And which of these do you think are facts, are true, or are you just quoting what you've seen elsewhere?
Starting a thread is starting a discussion. You put out the news you want to discuss and take it from there. Is it possible that the Euro clearing will be gone by 2019, yes. Will that lead to a huge amount of high paying jobs going? Yes. Will there be supporting jobs in those companies and there suppliers going? Yes. Will it be tens of thousands of jobs, looks very, very likely. Will it be exactly 100,000 on December 31st 2019, not sure.
The difference between this item (euro clearing) and the divorce bill is huge. The euro clearing is about something thats expected to happen in the near future. The divorce bill on the other hand is something thats been published. You'll notice that no one is, or has, challenged the fact that the Tories completely left out the contingent liabilities from their workings. No one has said that the divergence from the normal basis of working these figures out is justified (pensions discount and project cancellations).
If you want to discuss either or both the divorce bill or the job losses stemming from the loss of Euro clearing then I am absolutely happy to do that provided of course that you can bring correct information to the table and put up a coherent argument against the facts.
When Centaur keeps saying that the divorce bill is 38bn and its been reported by newspapers and tv news I can easily point out that they were reporting on the Tory published estimate and I can point to why the 38bn is wrong (again; contingent liabilities being completely left out, the pensions discount not matching any formula the Treasury or EU has used before and the Tories anticipating that eu project cancellations will for no reason suddenly almost double.)
If you can point to anything of substance that proves me wrong on the divorce bill or that shows a significant difference from the estimates regarding job losses on euro clearing then Im ready to have my mind changed."
"By 2019" does not mean on 31st Dec 2019. It means on or before 31st Dec 2018.
A bit like saying "I'll be there by 11 o'clock" ....you don't mean 11:59.
And btw, in your thread that you started, you said a minimum of 100,000. Now you're saying, "could be, possibly, maybe, perhaps, 10's of thousands".
And you didn't suggest it was possibly going to happen. You said it would definitely happen. By 2019.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Of course we still will still trade with the EU. We will also start doing well trading more with other wealthy contries like middle east, china, USA etc etc... its just common sense..
The remain campaign are trying to get a second ref.. Would he leave campaign be debating/moaning much if we voted to stay... we need to get the best deal and stop this moaning and negotivity..
Yes you will still trade with the EU but answer me this:
British beef and French beef are currently retailing in Paris for about the same price.
If there are tariffs added to British beef coming into the EU this will increase the price. (In a no deal situation where we revert to WTO terms that means €3 per kg plus 12.8% of the value. That roughly works out to 65% increase.)
Now,explain to me why the people of Paris are suddenly going to spend an extra 65% to get beef from Britain instead of paying the normal price for beef from their own country?
And if for some reason you think French people desire British beef so much that they would pay a 65% premium why arent they already charging that? Are British farmers so bad at business that theyre leaving billions on the table each year? Because I very much doubt it."
You do of course realise that works both ways. Why would brits pay a higher fee for French beef in the UK when they can buy British homegrown beef much cheaper.
Also your theory doesn't quite add up the way you've laid it out because you've not taken into account the drop in the value of the pound making British products much more competitive in global markets. Even now with a tariff increase the drop in the value of the pound against exchange rates for the most part cancels out any potential tariff increases on British products. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"
Of course we still will still trade with the EU. We will also start doing well trading more with other wealthy contries like middle east, china, USA etc etc... its just common sense..
The remain campaign are trying to get a second ref.. Would he leave campaign be debating/moaning much if we voted to stay... we need to get the best deal and stop this moaning and negotivity..
Yes you will still trade with the EU but answer me this:
British beef and French beef are currently retailing in Paris for about the same price.
If there are tariffs added to British beef coming into the EU this will increase the price. (In a no deal situation where we revert to WTO terms that means €3 per kg plus 12.8% of the value. That roughly works out to 65% increase.)
Now,explain to me why the people of Paris are suddenly going to spend an extra 65% to get beef from Britain instead of paying the normal price for beef from their own country?
And if for some reason you think French people desire British beef so much that they would pay a 65% premium why arent they already charging that? Are British farmers so bad at business that theyre leaving billions on the table each year? Because I very much doubt it."
Ireland's economy will be fucked then.
https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2017/0913/904427-irish-exports-to-uk/ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You've done it again, added an extra billion on thinking no one will notice and you've quoted £38 billion as the official divorce bill. After the last round of talks at the EU all the press and media quoted the official divorce bill as £37 billion, NOT the £38 billion you quoted. You also never quote any links to the extra you keep claiming is going on top. Why is that? Maybe because they don't exist?
You also say it's Tory estimate, but of course the EU also published the £37 billion divorce bill figure in their own papers and it's also been quoted by Barnier himself.
As for the changes to job losses that has been established in the OP on this thread, where the German banking boss said there is widespread reluctance of bankers to leave London and move abroad (also backed up with a link which you've failed to do). It's obvious based on his statement that the figure will now be lower than you and other remainers predicted during and after the referendum campaign.
You've also said you didn't say it would happen by 2019, then you've been proved wrong with a link to a thread which proves you did in fact say it! Honestly your credibility has been completely shot to pieces in this thread, you really should put the shovel down now and stop digging that hole for yourself. "
Actually I saw you quote 37bn, I looked it up and saw others quote 39bn (The Sun, 12 Dec 2017, Brexit divorce bill – how much will leaving the EU cost UK taxpayers? ) so I just split the difference rather than argue over a billion or two since it makes no difference really. But if you want to quarrel the figure, the Suns editors have their email on the website.
Well Ive already been banned once for posting links and its a stupid rule if theyre for well known sites like national news. I think it should be changed and the site feedback forum is available if you'd like to quarrel that too.
Contingent liabilities in the amount of ~11bn. If you can find a breakdown of the Tory estimate including this Id be very, very surprised.
The EU DID NOT publish any value on the divorce settlement as you well know. The Tories negotiated with the EU for the EU not to publish a figure on the settlement because it would contradict their figure. If you're saying Im wrong point out the EU publication that gives a figure for the divorce bill. An actual quote from Barnier: "I’ve never quoted any figures so I’m not going to start today." (The Express,Dec 8 2017, Brexit divorce bill REVEALED).
If you think my credibility has been shot to pieces because I quoted 2 articles to trigger a discussion then what must you make of your own? Remember claiming Davis surrender in the battle of the summer was a win because the Sun tried to spin it that way? Remember when you said the divorce bill wouldnt be 50bn, then crowed about it until I pointed out the contingent liabilities the first time round? Or any of the other times youve been emphatically proved wrong? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
You do of course realise that works both ways. Why would brits pay a higher fee for French beef in the UK when they can buy British homegrown beef much cheaper.
Also your theory doesn't quite add up the way you've laid it out because you've not taken into account the drop in the value of the pound making British products much more competitive in global markets. Even now with a tariff increase the drop in the value of the pound against exchange rates for the most part cancels out any potential tariff increases on British products. "
Of course it does work both ways. But the EU countries that used to sell cars and beef and milk to Britain can take over the customers Britain are losing. Not to mention that we have th rest of the EU to sell to and 127 different trade deals with over 50 different countries to take advantage of. Britain doesnt as of yet have any. And they have very little time to negotiate them all considering how long its taken just to do the deal with the EU which should have been the easiest.
And while the pounds crashing value does help with exports, its not enough to counter a 65% increase and it also drives up the cost of imports and the cost of living for English people.
"
Ireland's economy will be fucked then.
https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2017/0913/904427-irish-exports-to-uk/"
Yes Ireland is exposed because of Brexit but thats why we've been making moves like the ones in China which saw our agri exports there increase by 500% last year and today theyve opened up to Irish beef. We can also stop importing british beef while also exporting to Britain and we can look to take over the customers that Britain lose in the EU. And I can guarantee that theres a stability fund with EU money coming our way post Brexit. The Irish government has already been making grants available for companies to pivot after Brexit. And we've got the benefit of getting some of the large multi-nationals moving their business from Britain to Ireland to stay in the EU. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
In reality we will all know the outline of things in less than 7 months as all 28 parliaments have to ratify the deal - assuming one is done. The next crunch is if there is a transition period we only have 21 months to sort out trade deals with the world! We hope to copy & paste the 50 EU trade deals - but this has already been rejected by key players. 1/1/21 is when we will know what we are up against. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
