Brexit Official

S

schuylaar

Well-Known Member
SpiderDude said:
this is huge. the u.k was a very large pillar holding up the eurozone w/ germany. and really, the eurozone project is nothing when looking at european history. many country's with long histories and independent cultures questioning a union that was drawing them into one big globalized country. once they linked up as economic union, the bureaucrats ( un-elected ) telling people in many countries what to do, but the people in u.k. just told them fuck you and others will follow. the markets will now price in " what if's ", what if italy pulls out, what if france pulls out....... this is huge uncertainty and will force banks, large corporations to question lending and borrowing. ( cross border borrowing drives the entire regions economy ), all of this will now be questioned ( the question becomes will they be payed back or defaulted upon ), this uncertainty is the elephant in the room moving forward. who is the " bag-holder " regarding the trillions of debt of all these nations that have massive debt obligations amongst themselves. a cluster fuck of debt .....

the beginning of the end of the eurozone currency ( just as milton friedman predicted at it's inception ). a union of countries ( 25+ ) all under one currency ( euro ) and all under the same exchange rate. whats good for germany ( exchange rate ) is not so good for european countries with huge debt burdens, and countries with economies that are not performing.

this was always about control. once the masters in germany / brussels had economic control they started telling everyone what to do within the eurozone. un-elected bureaucrats telling people what to do ....... so now u.k. voters said fuck you.

look for european crisis hitting new levels as everyone is now calling for a referendums in france, spain, etc ....

look for interbank lending to freeze in some way moving forward, currency markets - debt / credit ( bond ) markets are the huge concern for the global central banks. these markets are much larger than the equity markets that trade ( tata motors, apple, ford, g.e... ), this will trigger massive loses short term but also cause havoc in the larger markets as interbank lending freezes and central banks pour more debt into marketplace as they jawbone bullshit sweet nothings but they themselves are shitting razor blades. everyones borrowing cost, interest rates will now explode upward.

in the end this is all about credit / debt. the money that has bailed out greece was never for the people or fixing underlying problem. the bailout funds from EU, IMF bounced from german banks into greece then back into german banks for funding debt obligations ( from greece to germany, italy, france ) who are owed hundreds of billions of dollars .......

the entire shit-show that is the eurozone today is built upon debt that must be serviced every month. if this does not happen, the largest banks around europe all go insolvent overnight. so merkel, mario draghi are all puppets for the large banks that made loans that can't be payed back without bailouts and austerity. the depression in greece is not about the economy, it unfolded because greece uses the euro and its exchange rate ( set by germany ) and not having control of their own currency ( drachma ). if greece had control of its own currency it could have devalued said currency ( like many have done during crisis events ) and greece would be doing much better today.

this is only day one. this will not unfold quickly, look for turmoil / volatility no matter what over many months for all of europe. this pressure will fall upon borrowing cost as one of the large pillars holding up the eurozone project now being removed. billions / trillions vaporized in just 24hrs but like 2007/2008 credit crisis, this will unfold slowly and bring about many surprises. if you are not liquid and operate with debt ( credit / debt is not money ), you will feel much pain moving forward ~
Click to expand...
And to think it all started with the greed of Wall Street..yet we still vote for oligarchy.

The banks haven't been lending since 2007 and certainly NOT to John Q. Public.

Unless money is outlawed in politics, it will always be this way, neverending.

I have to laugh at those poor dumb fucks leaving the House yesterday as one from their sit-in or whatever you called that mess..asking why you can't get legislation for the least little Ammendments of mandatory background checks and no fly; no buy. Tell me how you can really dispute selling arms to someone on the Terrorism Watchlist..tell me.

They act as if they have no clue; what an insult to our intelligence.

Yeah that's it, lawmakers..just keep holding hands, singing Kumbaya.

No one is going to help you, especially HRH..I mean..HRC.

Sanders still has my vote.
 
Last edited:
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
SpiderDude said:
Milton Friedman's prophetic article written 15 years ago:

"The Euro: Monetary Unity To Political Disunity?"


...... SAN FRANCISCO - A common currency is an excellent monetary arrangement under some circumstances, a poor monetary arrangement under others. Whether it is good or bad depends primarily on the adjustment mechanisms that are available to absorb the economic shocks and dislocations that impinge on the various entities that are considering a common currency. Flexible exchange rates are a powerful adjustment mechanism for shocks that affect the entities differently. It is worth dispensing with this mechanism to gain the advantage of lower transaction costs and external discipline only if there are adequate alternative adjustment mechanisms.

The United States is an example of a situation that is favorable to a common currency. Though composed of fifty states, its residents overwhelmingly speak the same language, listen to the same television programs, see the same movies, can and do move freely from one part of the country to another; goods and capital move freely from state to state; wages and prices are moderately flexible; and the national government raises in taxes and spends roughly twice as much as state and local governments. Fiscal policies differ from state to state, but the differences are minor compared to the common national policy.

Unexpected shocks may well affect one part of the United States more than others -- as, for example, the Middle East embargo on oil did in the 1970s, creating an increased demand for labor and boom conditions in some states, such as Texas, and unemployment and depressed conditions in others, such as the oil-importing states of the industrial Midwest. The different short-run effects were soon mediated by movements of people and goods, by offsetting financial flows from the national to the state and local governments, and by adjustments in prices and wages.

By contrast, Europe’s common market exemplifies a situation that is unfavorable to a common currency. It is composed of separate nations, whose residents speak different languages, have different customs, and have far greater loyalty and attachment to their own country than to the common market or to the idea of "Europe." Despite being a free trade area, goods move less freely than in the United States, and so does capital. The European Commission based in Brussels, indeed, spends a small fraction of the total spent by governments in the member countries. They, not the European Union’s bureaucracies, are the important political entities. Moreover, regulation of industrial and employment practices is more extensive than in the United States, and differs far more from country to country than from American state to American state. As a result, wages and prices in Europe are more rigid, and labor less mobile. In those circumstances, flexible exchange rates provide an extremely useful adjustment mechanism.

If one country is affected by negative shocks that call for, say, lower wages relative to other countries, that can be achieved by a change in one price, the exchange rate, rather than by requiring changes in thousands on thousands of separate wage rates, or the emigration of labor. The hardships imposed on France by its "franc fort" policy illustrate the cost of a politically inspired determination not to use the exchange rate to adjust to the impact of German unification. Britain’s economic growth after it abandoned the European Exchange Rate Mechanism a few years ago to refloat the pound illustrates the effectiveness of the exchange rate as an adjustment mechanism.

Proponents of the "Euro" often cite the gold standard era from 1879 to 1914 as demonstrating the benefits of a common currency. But the gold standard also had its costs. The period was characterized by declining prices from 1879 to 1896, rising prices thereafter, and sharp fluctuations within each period, especially severe in the 1890s. The standard was viable only because governments were small (spending in the neighborhood of 10 percent of the national income rather than 50 or more percent as now), prices and wages were highly flexible, and the public was willing to tolerate, or had no way to moderate, wide swings in output and employment. Take away the rose-colored glasses and it was hardly a period or a system to emulate.

As of today, a subgroup of the European Union -- perhaps Germany, the Benelux countries, and Austria -- come closer to satisfying the conditions favorable to a common currency than does the EU as a whole. And they currently have the equivalent of a common currency. Austria and the Benelux three have, to all intents and purposes, linked their currencies to the Deutschmark. However, these countries still retain their central banks and hence can break the link at will. Any country that wishes to link to the Dmark more firmly can do so on its own, simply by replacing its central bank with a currency board, as some countries (such as Estonia) outside the EU have done.

The drive for the Euro has been motivated by politics not economics. The aim has been to link Germany and France so closely as to make a future European war impossible, and to set the stage for a federal United States of Europe. I believe that adoption of the Euro would have the opposite effect. It would exacerbate political tensions by converting divergent shocks that could have been readily accommodated by exchange rate changes into divisive political issues. Political unity can pave the way for monetary unity. Monetary unity imposed under unfavorable conditions will prove a barrier to the achievement of political unity.
Click to expand...
Blah blah. Monetary union blah blah bullshit.

Britain rejected the adoption of the Euro a while ago. The reason leavers gave for exiting the EU was that they wanted control of their borders, laws and economic policy. All that shit about EU currency has nothing to do with Brexit. The most important factor that led to Brexit was that most British felt that merging with the EU was causing a negative effect in their lives. Just like in the US, globalization is only a good thing for mega corporations and the wealthy. Middle america sees no benefit to them in NAFTA, only downsides. Likewise, the British working and middle classes saw no benefit going their way from Britain's membership in the EU.

Friedman was full of shit anyway.
 
bluntmassa1

bluntmassa1

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
And to think it all started with the greed of Wall Street..yet we still vote for oligarchy.

The banks haven't been lending since 2007 and certainly NOT to John Q. Public.

Unless money is outlawed in politics, it will always be this way, neverending.

I have to laugh at those poor dumb fucks leaving the House yesterday as one from their sit-in or whatever you called that mess..asking why you can't get legislation for the least little Ammendments of mandatory background checks and no fly; no buy. Tell me how you can really dispute selling arms to someone on the Terrorism Watchlist..tell me.

They act as if they have no clue; what an insult to our intelligence.

Yeah that's it, lawmakers..just keep holding hands, singing Kumbaya.

No one is going to help you, especially HRH..I mean..HRC.

Sanders still has my vote.
Click to expand...
How can you support selling fertilizer to someone on the terrorist watchlist? Fuck a gun what's stopping them from digging up uranium and putting it in our water supply? If you they don't get a gun legally they can get a gun illegally they are terrorists the fuck they care about a law? Murder is against the law but it fails to prevent terrorism.

No matter what we do we will be vulnerable to terrorist attacks and if they really wanted to hurt us they would drive a van full of ammonium nitrate and whatever makes it explode into a nuclear power plant as close to a big city as possible. But no background checks on fertilizer so we are pretty much fucked if they really want to kill random people.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
bluntmassa1 said:
Or just leave guns alone because if there is a will there is a way and their are much worse things than guns.
Click to expand...
nah. it has worked for every country that has done it. you just need to stop your crying and carrying on already.

your litttle pea shooter doesn't protect you from tyranny, it just makes you feel better about your tiny, lily white, minuscule penis.
 
bluntmassa1

bluntmassa1

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
nah. it has worked for every country that has done it. you just need to stop your crying and carrying on already.

your litttle pea shooter doesn't protect you from tyranny, it just makes you feel better about your tiny, lily white, minuscule penis.
Click to expand...
Well it does feel good having guns don't really help with the penis much but I can eat the pussy real good and/or pick a wall and give it hell. :hump:

But still terrorists don't give a flying fuck about the law otherwise they would not murder. Are you telling me guns can't be smuggled in? I can put a few Israeli Uzis in the place of a bail of Mexican herb but better yet have a shipment of just guns and no need to worry about dogs.bongsmilie
 
bluntmassa1

bluntmassa1

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
nah. it has worked for every country that has done it. you just need to stop your crying and carrying on already.

your litttle pea shooter doesn't protect you from tyranny, it just makes you feel better about your tiny, lily white, minuscule penis.
Click to expand...
Also name one country with a black market like America. You can't we have gangsters from every corner of the earth.
 
Dr.Amber Trichome

Dr.Amber Trichome

Well-Known Member
What is London planning on doing with all the Muslims they have inherited? Including the newly elected mayor that had all the billboards torn down in the tube because he found them sexually offensive.
Yes , we did some really bad LSD, you know the kind that slowly turns to
Strychnine
complete with alien baby popping up through abdominal section and technicolor apocalyptic nightmares.
 
bluntmassa1

bluntmassa1

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
wtf is up with all the hate crimes and emboldened racists since the vote?

http://usuncut.com/world/hate-crimes-across-england-evoke-nightmares/
Click to expand...
Damn and them first two that got fucked up where white as it gets well maybe not ginger white. I'm telling you get a ginger riled up they don't give up broken nose, broken ribs they still trying to fight.

I think what we have here is your classic case of ginger rage syndrome. Don't you wish these victims had access to firearms?

Only thing stopping Aryans with guns is Blacks and Muslims with guns and Aryans are felons but best believe they have guns.
 
supreme bean

supreme bean

Well-Known Member
Dr.Amber Trichome said:
What is London planning on doing with all the Muslims they have inherited? Including the newly elected mayor that had all the billboards torn down in the tube because he found them sexually offensive.
Yes , we did some really bad LSD, you know the kind that slowly turns to
Strychnine
complete with alien baby popping up through abdominal section and technicolor apocalyptic nightmares.
Click to expand...
Not much about Muslims here.nintchdbpict000247463755.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top