"The British are frantically Googling what the E.U. is, hours after voting to leave it"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/06/24/the-british-are-frantically-googling-what-the-eu-is-hours-after-voting-to-leave-it/

and on that note, have a good weekend everyone!

Matt Z
Optimus Futures

There is a risk of loss in futures trading. Past Performance is not indicative of future results.

It's extremely poor journalism to use the drunken comments of a guy in a bar and then leap to the assertion that the entire Leave campaign is xenophobic. What utter crap. This isn't serious journalism.

Here's a review of a cross section of both sides views on social media from the London School of Economics:
BREXIT ? An undiscover?d country: the Brexit debate on Twitter reveals widespread democratic discontent

It does indeed show that migration concerns are a serious issue for both sides in the campaign. It also shows that a core issue is disatisfaction with dysfunctional democracy.

Quote:
...I want to find out more than just the big picture. I am interested in the particularities of identity contestation involved in the Twitter Brexit debate. I want to know what Brexit tweets tell us about the beliefs and values that drive British and European politics today. And my preliminary findings are showing some interesting trends.

Firstly, democracy is emerging as a core value that cuts across both camps. Both Leave and Remain tweets share a perception of growing democratic deficit and a desire for greater democratic accountability. There is a widespread belief that political elites are not representative, political parties are out of touch with voters, and the media cannot be trusted.
End Quote.


On the question of immigration, its perfectly possible and acceptable to have a debate about it - and this was certainly one of the main issues - without calling everyone xenophobic if they don't agree with the current policy. This is not to say that there aren't people who hold the views of the "Bob" character mentioned in the trash piece article, but to smear half of the UK as xenophobes is wrong, distasteful and frankly outrageous.

Net migration into the UK last year according to the governments official figures stood at 330k. The unofficial figures (which historically have proved extremely accurate in follow up censuses and many experts agree with) collated from net births and deaths together with applications for new social security numbers puts the figure at over 600k. A legitimate debate about this policy seems perfectly reasonable without the typical name calling and muck slinging.

The writer of the article doesn't bother to consider the possibility that a lot of those searches may actually come from people who voted Remain - and were told continuously that Leave wouldn't happen...No, no - far easier to trash the brits as stupid...

I suggest that you that you take your decibels on this argument a little lower and stop working yourself up.
We are just exchanging links here and ideas on a friendly basis!!

No one called anyone "stupid" and whether it came from the "remain" or "exit" is irrelevant! The point was that people are searching for things post a fact they decided on. More than anything, I thought it was funny as human nature.
It is a known fact that people worldwide may vote on things they do not understand the full implications of.

Matt Z
Optimus Futures
There is a risk of loss in futures trading. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Certainly not worked up here Matt. Quite the opposite. If you re-read what I said - its a reference to the writer of the article, not you (unless you wrote it ). As an exchange of ideas on a friendly basis - I wrote my opinion of what I consider to be poor journalism.

....I was also an investigative documentary maker in a previous life and I really hate to see lazy trashy journalism. It has a very subtle, cumulative subliminal effect on people's perceptions. Its a little different when its comedy - but this isn't presented as such.

Enjoy your weekend

Brexit

With 28 countries it is easy to get lost in the geopolitical maelstrom that is the European Union. Over the next few days (and couple of years) there will be literally thousands of stories to tell about the Britain-EU breakup. All will matter hugely to someone, but only a few will matter hugely to everyone. So let’s focus on the major points.

The United States is withdrawing from the world. The United States created and maintained the global free trade order. Without the United States’ smothering security presence, much of the world either will devolve as local powers fight for the scraps or return to their pre-1945 state of affairs. In Europe it will be a bit of both. One outcome among many is that the geopolitical environment of enforced peace and open trade that enabled the Europeans to form the EU in the first place is disappearing. For reasons well beyond the Europeans’ control, the EU is ending.

And for reasons well within the Europeans’ control, the EU is ending. If there is anything that the European Union has shown us in the past decade, it is that even in the face of an existential crisis its constituent members cannot come up with a common plan, much less a common vision. The European financial crisis -- complete with the Greek crisis -- began in 2006 and slides further down the rabbit hole with every passing year. The continent has suffered five recessions since this all started with most of its members now possessing smaller economies than before the Great Recession.

Europe is also dying for reasons independent of geopolitics and policy. All but six of its 27 members (the UK is one of the six) have already aged past any hope of demographic recovery. Germany -- the country the EU seems to be pinning its hopes on -- has the world’s most distorted population structure, with more people in their 50s than 40s than 30s than 20s than teenagers than children. Which means that all three forms of economic growth -- consumption, investment and export -- are about to prove beyond them. In essence, Europe’s aging is transforming it into a collection of old folks’ homes.
It isn’t hard to make the case that the UK jumping ship might not be all that bad of an idea.

So what happens next?

• The Brits will need a replacement trade association. There are two options. The easier of the two is a broad scale reinvigoration of the Commonwealth which will give the UK greater access to its old empire with countries large and small, near and far. The second is both simpler and more complicated: joining NAFTA. Simple in that the Canadians will make Brentrance a cause célèbre but complicated in that the Americans will make the Brits pay through the nose (think Lend-Lease). The Brits will ultimately succeed at both. Expect the Brits to be the only country in the world with a meaningful trade deal with India, and expect all the former British colonies that trade with the EU to shift loyalties.

• The EU leadership will want to hurt the UK, and hurt it badly, in order to dissuade others from following suit. In this they will fail. As the UK demonstrates that the EU isn’t inevitable a number of countries will see their own political systems reorder to the new reality. In particular, I’d keep my eye on Hungary (whose political system is departing from democracy and so just doesn’t fit in the club any longer), France (who feels the whole European project has gotten away from them), and Sweden (who only joined the EU because a united Europe served as a hedge against Russia).

• The UK was the one big country constantly pushing for the EU to expand and liberalize. Without London’s influence the EU’s slide towards parochialism, protectionism and a Fortress Europe mentality will harden. No more expansions. No more common foreign policy. No more Airbus.

• Expect the broad scale weakening of the European financial sector. Most of the EU’s financial business is settled in London and undoubtedly some of that will now relocate to the Continent. But most -- to the EU leadership’s chagrin -- will not. This will induce the EU to attempt to force its relocation using regulatory means. Considering that capital flight from the eurozone is already at record highs, expect such regulatory efforts to backfire. Horribly

you are certainly all aware of what is called the "bank passport". The bank passport is a EU regulation that state that any bank that has its head office in a EU country can do business in all the EU. This regulation plus a very favorable tax system was the major reason that have made UK the financial center of Europe.

By exiting the EU this point will be the main discussion point. It will have a major impact on UK economy and will raise a lot of concern also in the rest of the EU. A lot of other countries would be more than happy to see all those head offices coming to them.

London is the major/a major financial center for more than 200 years.
EU's business is done in London because of that - not the other way around.

As the comment above explains, the EU-Gutmenschen will attempt to force their will onto UK with regulations like this.
But money will move out of EU and people vote with their feet.

I try to speak about fact and regulation not politic or propaganda....

I am retired but believe me I would be very concerned to be a trader in London today.