UK Leaves the EU - What happens next?

[VSC]

There is a finite amount of wealth on the planet, the value of which fluctuates, but mostly increases, which decreases the value of the money that buys it. But all the while, the money in circulation is never enough to pay off what is owed.

Firstly I have to say that I am really enjoying the debate between you and bonusmedia ... making me think (!) and I am discovering new points of view ...

BUT (here we go), is there truly a finite amount of wealth on the planet?
Wealth is measured by assets, but is it the case that periodically we discover/create new assets.
While some assets may devalue previous assets (so may cancel each other out), there are some that simply add value without devaluing any others.

There was an announcement this week of a large helium gas find. Helium had been regarded as in short supply (and is used in MRI scanners and other devices - not just balloons!) Prices had been rising. The pricing is not expected to dip in proportion to the new find as demand is increasing ... So is this a case that a new discovery has increased wealth (assets)?

And what about "new" discoveries that create a new market without effecting any other market?

To be honest, it's just gone 8am, and my brain isn't in full working order yet. I need more coffee.

 

[websaway]

I'm back, for now at least. I think when you make enemies things get difficult.

where am I now on Brexit.
Just to refresh.
My reasons for Brexit were about loss of sovereignty and uncontrolled immigration.
The cost for pursuing Brexit was that the UK would have economic consequences.
The experts, most of whom had a vested interest in remaining in the EU, almost to a man or woman said that those consequences were to be negative to the extent from severe to catastrophic.
My view, as with the majority of the UK electorate who participated in the referendum, was that even if you believed the doomsayers, these risks were a price worth paying. Self interest was the prominent factor in the referendum, from the person who did not want their area taken over by economic migrants to the person who controlled a multi million pound property portfolio built and mostly reliant on increased immigration projections. All had their own reason to remain or leave. Everyone had but one vote and my view is that that's fair democracy, the only imbalance comes where individuals wield more power than their individual vote warrants, mostly through either access to media attention or blackmail by way of scaremongering.
Despite all those obstacles Brexit triumphed and I believe that victory rescued our freedom, our rights as a sovereign nation and our democracy.
That is my belief and it's based on the road we were going along and where that road was taking us. Now on the anniversary of the battle of the somme I am proud to believe that this revolution to preserve the power of self determination that some of us still hold dear was far far less expensive than that paid by our forefathers and for me anything less than economic Armageddon can be viewed as a bonus.

 

[BREWSTERS]

Firstly I have to say that I am really enjoying the debate between you and bonusmedia ... making me think (!) and I am discovering new points of view ...

BUT (here we go), is there truly a finite amount of wealth on the planet?
Wealth is measured by assets, but is it the case that periodically we discover/create new assets.
While some assets may devalue previous assets (so may cancel each other out), there are some that simply add value without devaluing any others.

There was an announcement this week of a large helium gas find. Helium had been regarded as in short supply (and is used in MRI scanners and other devices - not just balloons!) Prices had been rising. The pricing is not expected to dip in proportion to the new find as demand is increasing ... So is this a case that a new discovery has increased wealth (assets)?

And what about "new" discoveries that create a new market without effecting any other market?

To be honest, it's just gone 8am, and my brain isn't in full working order yet. I need more coffee.

The helium has always been there, so the new find hasn't created it. And it doesn't add to the money supply. Whoever owns that gas field will be able to trade the gas for money. The new find will decrease the value of any other stock of helium, perhaps only by a tiny amount but it will, because the new find doesn't proportionally increase the demand for it.

That's why we see the price of a commodity fall if someone dumps a significant amount of it on the market. Availability vs. demand creates price fluctuation.

 

[grandwizard]

I'm back, for now at least. I think when you make enemies things get difficult.

where am I now on Brexit.
Just to refresh.
My reasons for Brexit were about loss of sovereignty and uncontrolled immigration.
The cost for pursuing Brexit was that the UK would have economic consequences.
The experts, most of whom had a vested interest in remaining in the EU, almost to a man or woman said that those consequences were to be negative to the extent from severe to catastrophic.
My view, as with the majority of the UK electorate who participated in the referendum, was that even if you believed the doomsayers, these risks were a price worth paying. Self interest was the prominent factor in the referendum, from the person who did not want their area taken over by economic migrants to the person who controlled a multi million pound property portfolio built and mostly reliant on increased immigration projections. All had their own reason to remain or leave. Everyone had but one vote and my view is that that's fair democracy, the only imbalance comes where individuals wield more power than their individual vote warrants, mostly through either access to media attention or blackmail by way of scaremongering.
Despite all those obstacles Brexit triumphed and I believe that victory rescued our freedom, our rights as a sovereign nation and our democracy.
That is my belief and it's based on the road we were going along and where that road was taking us. Now on the anniversary of the battle of the somme I am proud to believe that this revolution to preserve the power of self determination that some of us still hold dear was far far less expensive than that paid by our forefathers and for me anything less than economic Armageddon can be viewed as a bonus.

urrmm Fantastic speech but nothing has changed. Politically Yes, legally NO, Reality NO,"feeling good is great" but by the looks of things nothing will be implemented. Leavers should hold their breathe for a while before claiming any sign of freedom.

 

[Brassneck]

urrmm Fantastic speech but nothing has changed. Politically Yes, legally NO, Reality NO,"feeling good is great" but by the looks of things nothing will be implemented. Leavers should hold their breathe for a while before claiming any sign of freedom.

Absolutely agree. Government made no plans for a leave vote and before the vote the civil service advice was that it would take at least 10 years for us to extricate our way out of the EU.

Nothing is going to happen quickly if at all.

 

[Edwin]

Michael Gove just stabbed Boris Johnson in the front by going directly up against him for Conservative Party leader!

But I have come, reluctantly, to the conclusion that Boris cannot provide the leadership or build the team for the task ahead.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...b03de63694b28a#block-5774d22de4b03de63694b28a

Cat, meet pigeons...

 

[Adam H]

Live blog this morning for those interested : http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/liveblogs/2016-06-30-2/

 

[Edwin]

Andrea Leadsom just declared too. I think you can see what's happening here: the Brexiteers do NOT want to win this, so are engineering to split their helping of the vote as much as possible...

 

[bonusmedia]

I knew I shouldn't have checked my phone....

Cake analogy - if you bake another, I don't get less as a result - agreed - but the creation of another cake devalued the first slightly (but increases the value of flour and eggs because there are less of them, and you are down by the cost of the ingredients.

Painting analogy - wealth hasn't been created, the value of the component parts has fluctuated IF, someone else pays you more for it. It's similar to a profit 'on paper'.

The cat site analogy - throughout the whole scenario as described, no wealth has been created. Money has moved around. People have paid money to see pictures of cats...not a commodity. And the £50m we've got is just a balance on a screen until we spend it. Buy a Ferrari each and we're just transferring money for a (usually) depreciating asset. None of which is affecting the global money supply or debt, or global wealth.

Couple of analogies for you.
You buy a house for £100k in cash - in 10 years it's worth £150k. Have you created wealth? No, because the replacement cost is the same.
If you bought it with a mortgage, you've paid £70k out and still owe £50k, meanwhile the replacement cost is still £150k - you're £20k down at this point. The bank is £20k up at this point, they've had £70k and still owns half your house ( but holds full title).

Next, you're in China, and all you have is a £50 note. Nowhere accepts Sterling - you effectively have nothing.

Cash doesnt necessarily equate to wealth.

There is a finite amount of wealth on the planet, the value of which fluctuates, but mostly increases, which decreases the value of the money that buys it. But all the while, the money in circulation is never enough to pay off what is owed.

OK... what we certainly can agree on is that we have very different definitions of 'wealth', and yours is an unusual one.
If, according to your definition, there is a finite amount of wealth that cannot be created or destroyed then wealth is a zero sum game.

I'm not sure your definition is particularly useful, because taken to logical extremes it says that someone with £50M in cash has no wealth and that we have the same wealth now as we had when living in caves 10,000 years ago. I think that defies common sense - i.e. most people would say it's not a useful definition. In fact I wonder if you're really just re-defining matter/energy as wealth.

BTW if you're in China with a £50 note, you certainly don't have nothing. You can change your £50 for local currency relatively easily. Money is useful precisely because it is a (practically) universally accepted store of value.

 

[VSC]

The helium has always been there, so the new find hasn't created it. And it doesn't add to the money supply. Whoever owns that gas field will be able to trade the gas for money. The new find will decrease the value of any other stock of helium, perhaps only by a tiny amount but it will, because the new find doesn't proportionally increase the demand for it.

Yes, it has always been there, but it has not be accounted for in the finite resources list.
But in this case, demand is increasing for helium so my point is that with increased demand the pricing may still go up.

Demand is not always defined by the product itself, but in the uses for that product which can increase quite separately from the actual product itself ...

Silicon for example was in demand to make semi-conductors, then computers and the solar industry saw demand for it increase yet pricing has just risen each time there was more demand. Though the pricing is down to the need for manufacturers rather than the raw ingredient itself ...

What you are saying (if I understand you correctly), is that nothing new that is discovered/created can only create demand by equally reducing the demand of something else, so they balance each other out?

 

[VSC]

Andrea Leadsom just declared too. I think you can see what's happening here: the Brexiteers do NOT want to win this, so are engineering to split their helping of the vote as much as possible...

conspiracy theory thread?

 

[VSC]

Very interesting programme on Radio 4 on the history, development, philosophy of sovereignty ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07hhvxx

 

[Edwin]

Referendum may come under legal challenge (not the result but the whole basis of it being held in the first place) And yes, the courts can - and do - trump the government, though of course it remains to be seen whether they would in this case!
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/30/politics-brexit-unlawful-eu-uk

 

[Edwin]

Related aside: anyone else having trouble sleeping? I haven't had a proper night since Wednesday last week**

(**Which may explain, though not justify, my peevish tone sometimes)

 

[bonusmedia]

Related aside: anyone else having trouble sleeping? I haven't had a proper night since Wednesday last week**

(**Which may explain, though not justify, my peevish tone sometimes)

Yes. I have a huge amount of work to do and keep getting sidetracked by internet arguments. I gave up arguing on the internet as a pointless and frustrating waste of time years ago. I also normally stick to the sensible rule of keeping religion and politics out of business. I put both aside last week because the referendum was 'too important' and I regret that decision but haven't quite been able to stop...

 

[bonusmedia]

Michael Gove just stabbed Boris Johnson in the front by going directly up against him for Conservative Party leader!


http://www.theguardian.com/politics...b03de63694b28a#block-5774d22de4b03de63694b28a

Cat, meet pigeons...

He's said himself many times that he's not right for the job, is this a serious bid?

We can't seriously have a prime minister who's scared of flying - although at this rate he won't actually be welcome anywhere else

 

[bonusmedia]

https://next.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151e-11e6-b197-a4af20d5575e

Gove wants to properly leave the single market - so at least there is some intellectual honesty about controlling immigration there, although the cost would probably destroy us for a generation

Then again he does admit he's not good with numbers. Another winning quality...

 

[websaway]

You are being driven in a car that is careering over a cliff.
You jump out and find you have to walk all the way home.
You notice that up ahead the car has stopped short of the cliff edge.
It might be worth asking the driver where they are heading for next.

 

[bonusmedia]

You are being driven in a car that is careering over a cliff.
You jump out and find you have to walk all the way home.
You notice that up ahead the car has stopped short of the cliff edge.
It might be worth asking the driver where they are heading for next.

To ask the driver where they are heading, turn to page 34.
To abseil down the cliff, turn to page 56.
To slay the dragon and rescue the princess, turn to page 21

 

[websaway]

Anyway, it does seem that, as fast as people conjure up reasons to render democracy redundant and the desire to instil fear and regret into the leave camp, facts arise that dismiss them as just wishful thinking.
This issue will now pan out over the coming weeks, months and years, and to repeat what might be an apt quote from a past thread.
" You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube"