Politics... World events

[BruceVC]

11 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

There will be some initial administrative hurdles that will impact the first two Qs, but when you get into the core of the deal, it's quite good for UK and it shows EU as a 'weak' entity. 

Okay, we are all entitled to our opinions. I dont see the EU as weak because there were compromises that had to made considering the complexity of BREXIT 

[Darkpriest]

4 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Okay, we are all entitled to our opinions. I dont see the EU as weak because there were compromises that had to made considering the complexity of BREXIT 

What are those compromises, that would be considered heavy in wieght compared to what was received back? 

Anything super significant in terms of capital markets? 

Anything super significant when it comes to access to the EU market? 

Anything in regards to movement of people? 

 

Any word on 'exit bill'? 

Edited January 15, 2021 by Darkpriest

[BruceVC]

6 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

What are those compromises, that would be considered heavy in wieght compared to what was received back? 

Anything super significant in terms of capital markets? 

Anything super significant when it comes to access to the EU market? 

Anything in regards to movement of people? 

 

Any word on 'exit bill'? 

Let me ask you a different question, what exactly should the EU have done  around BREXIT that would show you it wasnt " weak " 

Do you think a no-deal would be better for the EU and the UK ?

[Darkpriest]

8 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Let me ask you a different question, what exactly should the EU have done  around BREXIT that would show you it wasnt " weak " 

Do you think a no-deal would be better for the EU and the UK ?

The thing is, EU when pressed to a wall with a no deal scenario, made significant concessions to what their position and demands were. 

No deal was never the better outcome, but the decision to conceed shows that EU is a) not as determined, b) apparently had more to lose than officially claimed

[Gorth]

38 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

Anything super significant in terms of capital markets?

Not sure if capital markets are part of it, but the BREXIT deal does not include financial services, only goods. IIRC, that's less than 20% of all trade between UK and EU. 80% (me rounding numbers) is financial services, which UK banks are now isolated from the rest of Europe. They don't talk a lot about it, but it was really only the "small stuff" that got included in the deal. I don't know what was in the separate deal struck between UK and Spain regarding Gibraltar, but I'm guessing it was only allowing free movement of people, not transfer of funds to and from the money laundering facilities in Gibraltar.

[Darkpriest]

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/us-turkey-biden-erdogan-call-unanswered

[Boeroer]

17 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Not sure if capital markets are part of it, but the BREXIT deal does not include financial services, only goods. IIRC, that's less than 20% of all trade between UK and EU. 80% (me rounding numbers) is financial services, which UK banks are now isolated from the rest of Europe. They don't talk a lot about it, but it was really only the "small stuff" that got included in the deal. I don't know what was in the separate deal struck between UK and Spain regarding Gibraltar, but I'm guessing it was only allowing free movement of people, not transfer of funds to and from the money laundering facilities in Gibraltar.

I guess Frankfurt is very happy about that?

[BruceVC]

20 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Not sure if capital markets are part of it, but the BREXIT deal does not include financial services, only goods. IIRC, that's less than 20% of all trade between UK and EU. 80% (me rounding numbers) is financial services, which UK banks are now isolated from the rest of Europe. They don't talk a lot about it, but it was really only the "small stuff" that got included in the deal. I don't know what was in the separate deal struck between UK and Spain regarding Gibraltar, but I'm guessing it was only allowing free movement of people, not transfer of funds to and from the money laundering facilities in Gibraltar.

Yes but all banks and financial  institutions dont need to be part of trading blocks like  EU to operate in the global financial markets. There are global financial regulations and rules that dictate this. So I am not sure what you mean  by the UK banks are now isolated?

Being part of the EU for the UK as far as the banks is concerned was primarily about where people live and where they can  legally work. Banks in the UK will still continue to operate in all financial markets they use to operate in before BREXIT, more or less, in the same way 

Edited January 15, 2021 by BruceVC

[Darkpriest]

34 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Yes but all banks and financial  institutions dont need to be part of trading blocks like  EU to operate in the global financial markets. There are global financial regulations and rules that dictate this. So I am not sure what you mean  by the UK banks are now isolated?

Being part of the EU for the UK as far as the banks is concerned was primarily about where people live and where they can  legally work. Banks in the UK will still continue to operate in all financial markets they use to operate in before BREXIT, more or less, in the same way 

There might be some limitations where it comes to a primary vs secondary market on some instrument releases, but I do not think they touched any of that topic. 

[Gorth]

47 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Yes but all banks and financial  institutions dont need to be part of trading blocks like  EU to operate in the global financial markets. There are global financial regulations and rules that dictate this. So I am not sure what you mean  by the UK banks are now isolated?

Being part of the EU for the UK as far as the banks is concerned was primarily about where people live and where they can  legally work. Banks in the UK will still continue to operate in all financial markets they use to operate in before BREXIT, more or less, in the same way 

You're the expert, you translate it into plain English

From instituteforgovernment.org.uk (this is "old", from when Brexit was new) in case a no deal outcome happened and WTO rules ends up applying (which it did for the financial services sector). The value of this trade far outstripped the goods trade. The way I understand it, it's everything from tenders for financing projects to insurance.

How does trade on WTO terms compare?

Trading on WTO terms entails significant limitations on cross-border trade compared to passporting, and stricter regulatory requirements and supervisory oversight of the EU branches of UK banks. Both sides are also able to impose measures for ‘prudential reasons’ such as ensuring the stability of the financial system, which can lead to further restrictions.

The UK financial services sector is likely to trade with the EU on these terms in the event that no deal is agreed on the future UK–EU economic relationship.

 

What impact will Brexit have on the UK’s financial services trade with the rest of the world?

It is not only the relationship between the UK and the EU that will change after Brexit. By leaving the EU, the UK will no longer be party to trade arrangements between the EU and third countries around the world. EU agreements with third countries, such as its insurance agreements with the US[12] and Switzerland[13], will need to be re-established, and the recognition of other third country regimes in EU regulation will require replication in UK law.

Given the UK’s strengths in financial services, the government is likely to make these a focus of its new trade deals. The UK can also attempt to go beyond the market access rights provided under these EU arrangements. This is the case with the UK–Japan deal for example, which makes it easier for UK financial firms to apply for licences to operate in Japan.

[BruceVC]

12 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

There might be some limitations where it comes to a primary vs secondary market on some instrument releases, but I do not think

yhey touched any of that topic. 

Yes I dont disagree. Also global investment banks, outside the EU and UK, may now decide to have there new HQ in the EU and not the UK

But I tell you where I believe the UK is going to be hurt economically. Lets say Toyota wanted to invest in a new production factory  to make cars,  in the past when the UK was part of the EU they could have easily created that plant in the UK as they like the UK ease of doing business and access to Europe 

But now for Toyota is better to setup the production factory in the EU and not the UK because of tariffs and the failure of having easy access to the EU powerful single market. In other words many companies will ask themselves " where is my biggest customer base " and in most cases that will be the EU and not the UK 

[Gorth]

I found something that had actual Arabic numbers in it, discussing the impact:

https://www.toptal.com/finance/market-research-analysts/brexit-and-its-effect-on-the-uk-european-and-global-financial-sector

(as mentioned in previous post, passporting wasn't part of the deal, it was no deal, i.e. WTO rules)

Question 1: Is Brexit a big deal?

Unfortunately, the answer seems quite likely to be yes.

An analysis of the issues and concerns related to the financial sector bring up a raft of worrying conclusions.
In particular, these center around three important issues: passporting, regulatory uncertainty, and talent-drain.
Passporting: What is it, and why does it matter?

By far and away the most important issue at stake relates to passporting.

Passporting is the process whereby any British-based financial institution, be it banks, insurance providers, or asset management firms, can sell their products and services into the rest of the EU without the need to obtain a license, get regulatory approval, or set up local subsidiaries to do so.

Passporting, in conjunction with a few other key factors described below, has been a major reason why a large amount of financial institutions have decided to set up headquarters in London.

A recent report estimated that nearly 5,500 firms in the UK rely on passporting to conduct business with the rest of the EU. And the flows go both ways. More than 8,000 firms in the rest of the EU trade into the UK using passporting rules.

As Brexit looms, will passporting continue? The answer almost certainly seems to be no.

The only way for Britain to continue benefiting from passporting would be if it pursued a “Norwegian deal” with the EU (membership of the European Economic Area and adherence to all its associated rules).

But a Norwegian-style solution is extremely unlikely for the simple fact it would force Britain to compromise on the very same issues (specifically, immigration) that led to the Brexit vote in the first place.

So without passporting, are there other ways that UK firms could sell into the EU? One possible solution would be to go for a “Swiss deal” with the EU (essentially one focused on bilateral trade agreements).

But a Swiss-style solution also seems unlikely.

As Capital Economics points out, “It is unlikely that the UK would get a deal with the EU as good as Switzerland’s. The Swiss negotiated their deal when they were planning to join the EU; there would be less goodwill for a country leaving it”.

And even if it were achieved, there are strong doubts about the efficacy of such a model. More specifically, the “Swiss model” takes advantage of the so-called “third country equivalence” rules, which allow for non-member state firms to perform some of the same functions that passporting allows for.

 

 

edit: of course I left out the part with actual figures in it, silly me

Reason No. 1 is that the financial industry is by all accounts a hugely influential sector in the British economy, contributing 12 percent to the UK’s total GDP.

Output numbers aside, it generates more than two million jobs and is the country’s biggest export industry, accounting for nearly 50% of the UK’s $31bn trade surplus in services.

The UK financial sector’s relevance to the rest of the EU is also pronounced. British banks lend nearly $1.4 trillion to EU companies and governments. Much of the financial activities carried out in Europe are either directly or indirectly performed out of London (87% of US investment banks’ EU staff are employed in London (Chart 1).

 

[BruceVC]

5 minutes ago, Gorth said:

You're the expert, you translate it into plain English

From instituteforgovernment.org.uk (this is "old", from when Brexit was new) in case a no deal outcome happened and WTO rules ends up applying (which it did for the financial services sector). The value of this trade far outstripped the goods trade. The way I understand it, it's everything from tenders for financing projects to insurance.

How does trade on WTO terms compare?

Trading on WTO terms entails significant limitations on cross-border trade compared to passporting, and stricter regulatory requirements and supervisory oversight of the EU branches of UK banks. Both sides are also able to impose measures for ‘prudential reasons’ such as ensuring the stability of the financial system, which can lead to further restrictions.

The UK financial services sector is likely to trade with the EU on these terms in the event that no deal is agreed on the future UK–EU economic relationship.

 

What impact will Brexit have on the UK’s financial services trade with the rest of the world?

It is not only the relationship between the UK and the EU that will change after Brexit. By leaving the EU, the UK will no longer be party to trade arrangements between the EU and third countries around the world. EU agreements with third countries, such as its insurance agreements with the US[12] and Switzerland[13], will need to be re-established, and the recognition of other third country regimes in EU regulation will require replication in UK law.

Given the UK’s strengths in financial services, the government is likely to make these a focus of its new trade deals. The UK can also attempt to go beyond the market access rights provided under these EU arrangements. This is the case with the UK–Japan deal for example, which makes it easier for UK financial firms to apply for licences to operate in Japan.

Oh Im no expert, I have some knowledge and work experience but its limited 

But I have family members who do this every day for a living around investment banking  and other financial work so what I normally do is discuss these types of complex topics  with them and get their feedback. But end of the day somethings cannot be predicted with accuracy ...especially the long term economic impact of BREXIT on the UK and the EU

I will go through this and get their opinion on what it practically means 

[ComradeYellow]

6 hours ago, Lexx said:

I like how this dude tried to study law to become a lawyer or whatever and get himself out of it, but later dropped that, because he found out he aint smart enough for that.

Yes that's how all fascists become fascists.  They grow up with generally liberal viewpoints and go school thinking they're the new hotshots but the intellectual fortitude of their higher education peers knocks them out of it then they become losers and join the alt right.

I've heard that story so many times about about these twerps.

[BruceVC]

34 minutes ago, ComradeMaster said:

Yes that's how all fascists become fascists.  They grow up with generally liberal viewpoints and go school thinking they're the new hotshots but the intellectual fortitude of their higher education peers knocks them out of it then they become losers and join the alt right.

I've heard that story so many times about about these twerps.

Oh so that is how people join the alt right.....I always use to wonder, thanks for sharing  

Can I ask you an honest question, have you got experience in stand-up comedy or any skills around comedy generally. Because you make me laugh sometimes and its like you trained in humor ?

Keep it up by the way, please dont change 

Edited January 15, 2021 by BruceVC

[Zoraptor]

6 hours ago, Darkpriest said:

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/us-turkey-biden-erdogan-call-unanswered

Biden's also (re)appointing a bunch of guys who quit over Turkey attacking the Kurds in Syria like Brett McGurk, and appeasers like Jim Jeffrey are gone or going. Wouldn't expect anything significant to change in practice though in terms of US-Turkey itself, just for Turkey to be less aggressive in general and there to be less events that run counter to US geopolitical goals sponsored by Turkey. Well, until Erdogan needs a distraction from an imploding economy or a popularity boost before an election.

[Darkpriest]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/14/poland-plans-to-make-censoring-of-social-media-accounts

[Malcador]

3 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/14/poland-plans-to-make-censoring-of-social-media-accounts

Hm, so any forum moderation would be illegal then.

[Darkpriest]

1 hour ago, Malcador said:

Hm, so any forum moderation would be illegal then.

You can always tailor things to platforms, which have a registered user base above "xyz" who are not liable for content published there by their users, unless it's illegal as defined by law of the land on which the user is registered on/verified by residency/citizenship document, etc. 

Can also include that the account is in no way monetized, data not shared etc. (platform owner does not make profit from your activity) 

You can tailor things sufficiently enough, to make sure that forums like this would not be the target. 

There are areas/countries where FB and others comply with requirements on the threat of their services being locked out to the region. 

[Lexx]

This is just right wingers being scared of losing their voice.

Free speech is one thing, but constantly lying is another.

Edited January 16, 2021 by Lexx

[Maedhros]

Kind of ironic that they at the same time want to limit the freedom of gay people.

https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-54191344

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT-free_zone

Europe's Alabama.

Edited January 16, 2021 by Maedhros

[Gorth]

18 hours ago, Darkpriest said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/14/poland-plans-to-make-censoring-of-social-media-accounts

I don't know about Poland, but I know our own prime minister, Scott Morrison, who is an even more notorious liar than Trump, is shivering at the thought of someone suddenly starting putting a question mark on his online lies, so he's very busy to try to put a stop to someone who could question the truth of his messages. I would imagine that countries with dictators, autocrats, wannabe autocrats etc. are having sleepless nights and trying preemptively to forbid anyone from questioning the truth of their messages.

 

[Hurlshort]

2 hours ago, Maedhros said:

Kind of ironic that they at the same time want to limit the freedom of gay people.

https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-54191344

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT-free_zone

Europe's Alabama.

Yikes, this is a ridiculous quote from that BBC article:

Quote

Then he passes me a sticker that came free with his magazine, the right-wing weekly Gazeta Polska. It shows a rainbow flag with a black cross through it. "We gave out 70,000 of these," says Sakiewicz. "And people congratulated us because we Poles love freedom."

Displaying freedom by putting a giant black X over the symbol of another group? Okey dokey.

[Darkpriest]

11 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

Yikes, this is a ridiculous quote from that BBC article:

Displaying freedom by putting a giant black X over the symbol of another group? Okey dokey.

The thing is, that wasn't some mainstream thing. Some far right wing politicians will try to make it look better than it was, but as long as it is not illegal, let the fools make more of a fool themselves. People tend to avoid extremes, so if they can constantly see what other people see, they will react to more of that by avoiding such nuts. 

 

When you start censoring such on one side, and do not do so on the other side, which says left extreme things, the natural behavior of those undecided will be to move away to the right, while not seeing the full scope of risks there. 

 

And by silencing them, you will start sparking emotions, which then lead to conspiracies and radicalization. 

 

In the past, there is a reason why pre-elections, a couple more mouthy politicians with crazy talk were being hidden by their own party as the nonesense they spew was too much and while entrentching own radical side of supporters, it made more centrists people afraid to vote such. 

Seems that these days you are viewed as either an alt-right nutcrack, or sj-lefty dumbass. 

In truth, both sides should tolerate others existence and right to express views, even if some of them are radical. Usually that leads to some compromised middleground being followed while you have dogs barking from the both extremes. 

 

 

 

[Lexx]

4 hours ago, Darkpriest said:

and do not do so on the other side, which says left extreme things

Ok, I'll bite. Where are these (full of lies) left extreme twitter accounts that should be censored?

Honest question, because I don't know any of them.

Edited January 16, 2021 by Lexx