Brexit means Brexit

[Kidlicious]

How many good accountants are unemployed in the EU?

[BlackCat]

.

[Dauphin]

i) Banks aren't moving jobs wholescale out of London (yet). They are still waiting to see what Brexit negotiations lead to. What they are doing is building up their infrastructure in EU locations as a contingency.
ii) If things look bad, then affected business lines will move to these locations, but most business would be retained in London where there is vastly superior infrastructure. Non-EU centric business being done in London is not about to move to another EU location - there is no benefit in moving. In fact, the opposite - see iii).
iii) Expect the UK to change laws and regulation to make financial business in London more attractive. Looser banking regulation, higher pay for bankers, lower taxes, whoring out to take dodgy money from Africa and Asia. All in all, it will look more like a tax haven than it already is.

Whether you consider iii) good or bad is a matter of whether you are one of the lucky ones who gets to make more money or not.

[Dinner]

No, that is the expected scenario. I'm pretty sure that the EU won't accept that vital euro/banking operations will take place outside EU. The estimates that I have seen is that some 230.000 banking workers will move away from London - probably to somewhere in germany.

As usual Oerdin is wrong

Fantasy.

[kentonio]

I'm pretty sure that the EU won't accept that vital euro/banking operations will take place outside EU.

I don't see why they would even consider leaving them in the hands of London. It was only our membership of the EU that protected that position in the first place, and even then the ECJ said it could change in future. Yet when this was pointed out to leave voters, they either screamed 'Project Fear!!' or they just didn't give a **** because they hate the privileged London bankers. At least I can find some sympathy for the latter view, but they don't seem to realize that the consequences will be devastating for themselves too. I've hear so many idiots saying 'well things couldn't get any worse' that I just want to tear my hair out. They're about to find out just how much worse things can indeed get.

[Dauphin]

I don't see why they would even consider leaving them in the hands of London. It was only our membership of the EU that protected that position in the first place, and even then the ECJ said it could change in future. Yet when this was pointed out to leave voters, they either screamed 'Project Fear!!' or they just didn't give a **** because they hate the privileged London bankers. At least I can find some sympathy for the latter view, but they don't seem to realize that the consequences will be devastating for themselves too. I've hear so many idiots saying 'well things couldn't get any worse' that I just want to tear my hair out. They're about to find out just how much worse things can indeed get.

Membership of the EU can't be the only reason, given that Euro-denominated clearing actions are also done in New York and elsewhere outside the EU. Of course, the EU may change the rules to spite the UK, and in the process a few other countries, but I don't think its a good idea for anyone - the UK would lose business and the EU would be dicking around with their financial stability.

[kentonio]

Membership of the EU can't be the only reason, given that Euro-denominated clearing actions are also done in New York and elsewhere outside the EU. Of course, the EU may change the rules to spite the UK, and in the process a few other countries, but I don't think its a good idea for anyone - the UK would lose business and the EU would be dicking around with their financial stability.

It's not about spite though, its about moving a lot of jobs and money within EU borders. It's only perceived as spite because we'd be the ones losing out.

[Dauphin]

It'd be politically motivated, as it's a dumb economic move for several reasons. The EU would be hurting itself more than it gains. For example, it may result in the EUR being less appealing as a reserve currency, seeing trade shift to other currencies, notably dollars. Alternatively it'd be considered to be acting in a protectionist manner that would bring retaliation and trade restrictions, including from the US. Preventing EU clearing houses like Clearnet from trading USD denominated trades would be extremely costly (with operations possibly shifted to London who are not being protectionist)

[Dinner]

Membership of the EU can't be the only reason, given that Euro-denominated clearing actions are also done in New York and elsewhere outside the EU. Of course, the EU may change the rules to spite the UK, and in the process a few other countries, but I don't think its a good idea for anyone - the UK would lose business and the EU would be dicking around with their financial stability.

This.

[kentonio]

It'd be politically motivated, as it's a dumb economic move for several reasons. The EU would be hurting itself more than it gains. For example, it may result in the EUR being less appealing as a reserve currency, seeing trade shift to other currencies, notably dollars. Alternatively it'd be considered to be acting in a protectionist manner that would bring retaliation and trade restrictions, including from the US. Preventing EU clearing houses like Clearnet from trading USD denominated trades would be extremely costly (with operations possibly shifted to London who are not being protectionist)

You seem to be forgetting they ALREADY tried to do this while we were in the EU, and they only lost the court case because of Britain being an EU member and having considerable sway. This isn't something they've dreamed up to try and hurt Britain, its something they've wanted for a long time, and now the big thing stopping them is moving out of the way.

[Dinner]

They will have a major problem when everyone else retaliates thus damaging the EU economy.

[BeBMan]

Not sure why some ppl think immigration from eastern europe is a prob for the UK when Brits go to the Poles again and again

/harhar

Corbyn vs. May today!

[Bereta_Eder]

Oerdin is an idiot. Nuff said.

Indeed. Just thought I should re-iterate the fact.

And now to the thread

[giblets]

Wow it looks like all the ppl who were saying Corbyn is unelectable may have been wrong

[Bereta_Eder]

Wait. If corbyn wins, then haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaa aaaaaaaa





Good stuff brothas


Hmm, it says that the not so iron lady doesn't get parliamentary majority not that corbyn wins.

which means political deadlock and a weak negotiating mandate ofr the may (in june)