The Brexit referendum thread: potential consequences for GB, EU and the Brits in CH

[k_and_e]

	Quote:	marton
	Why is it unique? In principle it is no different from the federated US States, US territories, Ecuador, El Salvador, Zimbabwe, Timor-Leste, Micronesia, Palau, and the Marshall Islands using the US$ or the federated Swiss Kantons and Liechtenstein using the Swiss Franc? The franc was reintroduced as Switzerland’s currency on 7 May 1850 with the “Federal Coinage Act”. Before then the cantons, municipalities & abbeys all had their own currencies.

CH is a country, so is the US.
Also there is no central bank for all countries adopting the USD countries.

EU countries have total different governmental, cultural, economical, monetary traditions to start with. EU budgetary deficit rules are not enforced. Countries are not or reluctantly willing to help each other. In other words, it's not a country or a community but ruled as one.

I find it a pity actually. I like the concept of a union but it is becoming more like a monster. The euro was a mistake, especially in terms of letting countries adopt the currency that didn't meet formal qualifications at all.

[marton]

	Quote:	Clocker
	Pathetic and couldn't be further from the truth. When still in the UK I had far more contact with foreigners than with British citizens and this out of choice. I've spoken seven languages, lived in six different countries, four of which are in the EU, yet I still voted 'Leave'. None of my relatives voted for the EC in 1973. None of them voted 'Remain' in 2016 and nobody they know, nor anybody I personally know voted 'Remain'. Most people in the UK (and the referendum result reflected this clearly), have had enough. You can be against the EU without being xenophobic or anti-European. I've lived longer outside of the UK than in. Apart from this being a sweeping generalization, You conveniently left out the fact that none of these countries are in the EU customs union, none are in the Euro and they are also some of the richest, most prosperous and successful countries in the world with the highest quality of life. None of them need to be in the EU. What for when bilateral agreements work better? If they can work for these four countries, there is no reason why they can't work for the UK. Exactly.

You wrote "none of these countries are in the EU customs union, none are in the Euro". The UK is also not in the euro?
Correct those countries are not in the EU customs union but they are in the European Single Market.

So you assumed your vote for Brexit included UK remaining in the single market? Otherwise your comparison is not logical that it will "work for the UK".

[Swisstree]

Unsurprisingly, Boris and Cummings are up to their old tricks and have employed MAGA bots on Twitter, no doubt FB too. Many saying that the LBC comments are swamped by fake accounts too.

The future of the country is being manipulated on a grand scale by that poisonous weasel Cummings. It's sickening.

Ast Prof Mid East Studies Marc Jones analysed 13,000 retweets of Boris Johnson's.

https://twitter.com/marcowenjones/st...62506135121926

[bowlie]

Er, ...

West African CFA franc (8 countries)
Central African CFA franc (6)
Eastern Caribbean dollar (7)
CFP franc (3 (territories))
GCC countries (fixed peg to each other, and USD) (5)

Many countries use the USD, although Zimbabwe no longer does.

[RufusB]

	Quote:	Clocker
	Pathetic and couldn't be further from the truth. When still in the UK I had far more contact with foreigners than with British citizens and this out of choice. I've spoken seven languages, lived in six different countries, four of which are in the EU, yet I still voted 'Leave'. None of my relatives voted for the EC in 1973. None of them voted 'Remain' in 2016 and nobody they know, nor anybody I personally know voted 'Remain'. Most people in the UK (and the referendum result reflected this clearly), have had enough. You can be against the EU without being xenophobic or anti-European. I've lived longer outside of the UK than in.

But this is merely your own experience. It doesn't follow that your view is the majority view. Your life choices informed your decision.

However, both my hometown, and the town I worked in for nearly a decade voted overwhelmingly to leave precisely because of a decent amount of xenophobia and experience of anything much outside their immediate geography. Both are ex-mining towns with a significant amount of economic hardship and narrow experiences. Forrins were indeed the knee-jerk issue for many.

My family were a 50/50 voting split. Christmas was ... tense... that year. We've since moved on. In fact two Leavers say that if they could vote again they would vote Remain because they hadn't fully understood the possible future repercussions for younger family members. My Nan hasn't changed her mind, but then her view of "Foreigners" was firmly set during WW2. Apart from the Foreigners she knows. They're different.

Of course you can be anti-EU without being xenophobic. However to decry that some voting decisions were made with a dose of xenophobia is... not seeing the whole picture. But honestly I think someone would need to live and work in the UK for a decent period of time in order to fully understand the myriad emotions. That isn't a dig, but by your own admission you've been out longer than in and your sample size is small.

[Dinivan]

	Quote:	k_and_e
	CH is a country, so is the US. Also there is no central bank for all countries adopting the USD countries. EU countries have total different governmental, cultural, economical, monetary traditions to start with. EU budgetary deficit rules are not enforced. Countries are not or reluctantly willing to help each other. In other words, it's not a country or a community but ruled as one. I find it a pity actually. I like the concept of a union but it is becoming more like a monster. The euro was a mistake, especially in terms of letting countries adopt the currency that didn't meet formal qualifications at all.

Economists agree that an optimal currency area needs to fulfill 4 requirements:
1- There should be free movement of labour. People can move freely within the EU, but there’s more barriers than in countries like the USA where everyone speaks the same language. Generally, Europeans are less likely to move within the European Union than their American counterparts. However this trend is changing thanks to initiatives like Erasmus or to new technologies that allow easier movement around the continent. For example, Portugal's recession was mitigated by the huge outflow of unemployed Portuguese moving abroad.

2- Capital should be free to flow between member countries: this is associated with wage and price flexibility, e.g. if Romanian salaries are lower, then companies should be able to set their factories there. The EU has different minimum wages and rules regarding employment, but so do the different states of the US or Australia, for example.

3- There should be automatic fiscal transfers between countries: In the US states that perform poorly receive large fiscal transfers from the federal government, as the federal budget is very big. By contrast, the EU fiscal transfers, whilst existing, are relatively tiny.

4- Countries should share the same trade cycle: for example, France should not be in a boom when Finland is in recession. This is important because the monetary policy is unique for all the countries. If the ECB applies a contractionary monetary policy to keep inflation and growth down in that scenario, Finnish recession would worsen considerably. However, this is a problem shared by most countries to an extent: In the UK, for example, there are regions that perform economically much worse than others (Northern England vs Southern England vs Scotland vs NI...), yet the BoE only sets one interest rate. Similarly, Western Australia went into recession in 2016 whilst the rest of the country was still growing: “For the best part of a decade, Western Australia’s miracle economy held up the rest of the nation as companies ploughed billions of dollars into the state and anyone with a pulse could find a job. But now WA is stuck in a deepening recession with the highest unemployment rate in the country — and the state is officially dragging the rest of the country down with it.”. In China, coastal provinces that have enjoyed growth thanks to globalisation perform much better than inland rural areas.


Arguably, the major problem of the Eurozone nowadays is the lack of automatic fiscal transfers. This could change in the future, in particular thanks to Macron's push for this and when the UK leaves the union. But few people question the adequacy of the AUD for Australia or the GBP for the UK despite the fact that they also suffer regional unemployment and decoupled trade cycles.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	Clocker
	Apart from this being a sweeping generalization, You conveniently left out the fact that none of these countries are in the EU customs union, none are in the Euro and they are also some of the richest, most prosperous and successful countries in the world with the highest quality of life. None of them need to be in the EU. What for when bilateral agreements work better? If they can work for these four countries, there is no reason why they can't work for the UK.

And your sweeping generalization is that because they are outside the EU, they are successful.....

And you are also conveniently leaving out some of the facts:
- None of them are trading on WTO terms alone
- They are all members of EFTA and have over 40 TFAs with countries outside the EU
- None of them are facing the opposition of 30+ Irish-America voters to their trade with the US
- None of them are facing the opposition of 47+ members at the WTO, an organization that requires the agreement of all 168 members.
- None of them rely on services and in particular financial services as a significant foreign currency earnings

None of these economies have much in common with the UK and expecting it to suddenly become like them is not realistic.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	k_and_e
	That's the wrong question to ask as the euro is a rather unique concept. The question to be answered is why the euro concept would work while every other currency doesn't.

You made a claim that the control of a currency makes a significant impact on management of the economy. Either you come up with examples or you claims are baseless. It’s up to you to prove your credibility.

[Dinivan]

	Quote:	k_and_e
	I don't know either but the 4 countries actually have in common that they are all pretty successful.

Actually, as much as I love Switzerland, not being part of the EU is probably harming its economic prospects. The country lives to some extent off past wealth, but EU countries have been catching up for some time now. Not just stellar Ireland, but many others.

Check this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...PP)_per_capita

In 2010, Swiss GDP per capita was 20% higher than in the NL. Now it's around 10% higher. The difference has shrunk from 29% to 21% with Germany; from 26% to 22% with DK; from 25 to 24 with AT; from 47% to 42% with the UK...

A lot of business that in the past would have come to Geneva or Zurich, is now going to Ireland, Luxembourg or the Netherlands.

[Blueangel]

Utterly disgusting

https://metro.co.uk/2019/08/30/mum-l..._source=pushly

[Clocker]

	Quote:	greenmount
	Not true, all of them are in the EU customs union

Wrong. None of the four are in the EU customs union.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	Clocker
	Wrong. None of the four are in the EU customs union.

It does not really matter because you basic assumption is completely bogus as already pointed out.

[greenmount]

	Quote:	k_and_e
	CH is a country, so is the US. Also there is no central bank for all countries adopting the USD countries. EU countries have total different governmental, cultural, economical, monetary traditions to start with. EU budgetary deficit rules are not enforced. Countries are not or reluctantly willing to help each other. In other words, it's not a country or a community but ruled as one. I find it a pity actually. I like the concept of a union but it is becoming more like a monster. The euro was a mistake, especially in terms of letting countries adopt the currency that didn't meet formal qualifications at all.

Some traditions might be different, but the general population's expectations and current cultures (we do not see ourselves as out fore-parents at say 1700) are not that different or incompatible as some wish they be.

I think that's actually the entire purpose of this project - developing the whole European area and making each country stronger exactly because they belong to a larger "country".

And I really want to bring the fact that EU is NOT Soviet Union where countries were forced by the Soviet army and their tanks to "join" in. Each of them has worked towards harmonising their legislation and implementing various standards that maybe some of them didn't have before.

And we have peace. From my corner of the world that mean SOMETHING.

[Blueangel]

	Quote:	Clocker
	When still in the UK I had far more contact with foreigners than with British citizens and this out of choice.

That's unusual unless your family were also immigrants. In that case, I would find it more understandable and have examples of that within my own family.

	Quote:	Clocker
	You can be against the EU without being xenophobic or anti-European.

I heard that a lot when I lived near Slough and usually from the families of non-EU immigrants who strongly resented FMOP. Slough voted Leave quite heavily.

	Quote:	Clocker
	I've lived longer outside of the UK than in.

You keep saying that.

In an earlier post you said that you'd been living outside of the UK for 15yrs 8mths and 3 weeks at the time of the EU Referendum. That would mean that you left the UK in early October, 2000 and have now lived outside of the UK for 18yrs 11mths. It would also mean that at the very most, you were 18yrs and 11mths old when you left, which is pretty young (though not unheard of) to emigrate to another country without your family.

	Quote:	Clocker
	None of my relatives voted for the EC in 1973. None of them voted 'Remain' in 2016 and nobody they know, nor anybody I personally know voted 'Remain'.

1. Were any of your family resident in the UK and eligible to vote in 1973?
2. If your family left the UK when you did, they wouldn't have been legally eligible to vote in the 2016 Referendum.
3. You're hardly going to know family who voted Remain if they weren't eligible to vote at all.

	Quote:	Clocker
	I've spoken seven languages, lived in six different countries, four of which are in the EU, yet I still voted 'Leave'.

So the vast majority, if not all of your experience of living as an adult in an EU country is based upon 4 countries other than the UK.

I'm staggered that you even bothered to vote in the referendum when you only lived in the UK for a maximum of 11mths as an adult. It truly beggers belief.

[Clocker]

Michel Barnier rejects demands for backstop to be axed

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49540681

The EU could not stop the UK from leaving without a deal, he said, but he "would fail to understand the logic of that choice" because "we would still need to solve the same problems after 31 October".

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	Clocker
	Michel Barnier rejects demands for backstop to be axed https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49540681 The EU could not stop the UK from leaving without a deal, he said, but he "would fail to understand the logic of that choice" because "we would still need to solve the same problems after 31 October".

And it will be more difficult since the UK will be a third country and the treaty framework will no longer apply. Furthermore the Canada and Japan trade agreements will apply - the mutual approval of either party granting a trade agreement to a third country that is as good as the one in the treaty.

[k_and_e]

	Quote:	Jim2007
	You made a claim that the control of a currency makes a significant impact on management of the economy. Either you come up with examples or you claims are baseless. It’s up to you to prove your credibility.

US in 1982 is of course a famous example but also the current expansionary monetary policy that many countries are using now are a good example, including the eurozone as a whole.

[Dinivan]

The Swiss at the moment don't have an effective control of their monetary policy despite having a separate currency. Although the CHF is not pegged to any currency, like the Danish Krone to the Euro, the SNB/BNS has to follow closely the changes in interest rates of the ECB. This is to avoid suffering an unreasonable appreciation of the CHF against the Euro, which would reduce the Swiss inflation even further as the price of imports would plummet and potentially bring the country into a severe deflationary period.

The SNB/BNS is concerned about the risk of real estate bubbles in the country, so ideally it would raise the interest rates. But it just can't do it.

The world has changed a lot since the 1980s. The interconnectedness of the world means that a country's monetary policy is no longer as effective as it used to be without coordination with other countries.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	k_and_e
	US in 1982 is of course a famous example but also the current expansionary monetary policy that many countries are using now are a good example, including the eurozone as a whole.

So an example of triggering a down turn is a good example.... it is one of the reason.... remember the objective as monetary policy to avoid or come out of a recession, no to start one and then be unable to undo it.

[Jim2007]

	Quote:	Dinivan
	The SNB/BNS is concerned about the risk of real estate bubbles in the country, so ideally it would raise the interest rates. But it just can't do it.

And they are still having to conduct market operations in defence of their Euro Bond holdings. Most recently the Irish Central Bank, noted that they had done so in favour of Irish Euro bonds last March.