Brexiteers: even in victory they can't get the figures straight

Given that UK stocks had performed more strongly than pre-referendum levels, this questions whether it sensible to revise down the GDP growth figure.

I didn't say ignore it.

I said that it is not an accurate reflection of the health of the UK economy when they don't make the majority of their profits from the UK.

If you are so confident about the state of the UK economy then I suggest you buy some bargain property stocks or whatever.

Furthermore, since most these companies make their profits abroad, it is doubtful that they pay huge amounts of tax here.

International businesses are also directly influential of the health of the UK economy due to the amount of people they employ.

I can always tell you that my family actually invests in properties and I have bought a UK-based property stock (LONTG) which is currently at its pre-referendum level.

Name me one economics text book that uses stock market capitalisation to workout GDP growth using the buffet method.

I will save you the Google. It doesn't exist.

I really don't care any longer. Just stop lying.

ROFL. No, it isn't. June 23rd 648. Today 618.

Yeh,well, I can tell that you didn't do economics.

Using Stock market capitalisation to work out GDP growth.

Anyway, I am off. Nice chatting.

Those very organisations did not predict that the FTSE 100 will reach an 11-months high post-Brexit, nor did they predict that FTSE 250 will remain at the same level. What do you say to these figures?

You know surely this isn't true, right? Whether you like to admit it or not, we all benefit from British democracy, it is the very reason we have the rights to elect our own government and remove them if we want to. Are you saying you don't find them important? As to immigration, it is a very valid issue that affects everyone for better or worse. Just because some people find uncontrolled immigration a negative impact on their lives, does not mean they are racists or nationalists.

You are picking out the top 5 by market capitalisation which to hard to achieve such a big cap with only domestic activity.

The AIM comprises mostly of medium sized businesses, and will include most of the domestic companies he was referring to.

This is why I was suggesting that the UK possibly as a whole, has a much more outward-focused trading activity than he expected.

Yeh, well that is the Brexit con trick.It is basically impossible to prove if we would worse off in 10-15 years outside the EU.

The Financial services industry are already moving jobs abroad. So, let's not pretend that we are in the same position as before.

And like I said before, no access to the single market without free movement. That includes the Swiss. Do their banks have passporting? No. So let'snot pretend that they are a "good" example.

Maybe you can google the 'Buffett Indicator' and look at credible sources citing its usage.

One article even stated that 'the most important indicator of the stock market valuation is what we called Buffett-indicator.'

Let's put partisanship aside for a minute and discuss the facts. Neither side can be 100% sure of the long-term effects of such a move. In 1992, many of the same economists and institutions said that Switzerland would become a developing nation if it didn't join the EEA. More than twenty years later and this has not happened. Fact is that despite the importance of expert opinion, it should always be taken with a grain of salt.

The criteria under which an institution can provide services across the common market is not restrictive nor does it specifically require membership. 'Brexit' will place restrictions on this, unless a bilateral agreement is reached. Again, stop appealing to sensationalism and see what happens.

Let's put partisanship aside for a minute and discuss the facts. Neither side can be 100% sure of the long-term effects of such a move. In 1992, many of the same economists and institutions said that Switzerland would become a developing nation if it didn't join the EEA. More than twenty years later and this has not happened. Fact is that despite the importance of expert opinion, it should always be taken with a grain of salt.

* There's a vast difference between moving an entire bank's operations to another country and moving some jobs to another nation. Let's wait and see what happens before appealing to *

*The criteria under which an institution can provide services across the common market is not restrictive nor does it specifically require membership. 'Brexit' will place restrictions on this, unless a bilateral agreement is reached. Again, stop appealing to sensationalism and see what happens.

Pre-referendum level means the short period before the referendum date, it doesn't necessarily means the referendum date. To give you an example, it fluctuated between 604 and 653 the week before the referendum. 618 is currently within that margin.

As I stated the Buffett Indicator is actually very widely used, I'm actually surprised you are not familiar with its usage.

Other posters in this thread have thoroughly destroyed your pathetic point already, I need not comment.

Oh, but I do know this is true.

Roughly 500 million people live in the EU. Of those, the vast majority are fine with not having directly elected officials working in Brussels - it's really just the Brits that cause trouble. Direct democracy is not always required, the referndum showed what happens when you give the unwashed masses direct influence on the fate of a much larger group.

This is not about uncontrolled immigration. This is about xenophobic Brits not wanting for Britain to fulfill its obligation to humanity by taking in refugees - not so much because they know that they would be another strain on your shaky welfare system and overrated health care system but because they just hate foreigners. Feeling a negative impact and actively voting against immigration are too different things. But empathy or solidarity was never a strong side of you lot...

Who said it wasn't? I didn't talk about stock market valuation. That is just something you made up. *

Lol. Well done. Went from 604 to 618

The AIM index is weighted by Market Cap. Given the top 5 (accounting for 15% of total marcap) are all heavily "outward-focussed" I'm quite sure the majority of AIM MarCap will also be driven by overseas trading, hence the exchange rate sensitivity.


Posted from TSR Mobile

I will give you the benefit of the doubt, although most AIM-listed stocks I have traded were actually domestic businesses.

What is wrong with a market dominated by outward-focused businesses? As I said they employ people and pay tax just like any other businesses, they contribute just as much if not more. If the UK is to benefit from the exchange rate then roll on.

The 2nd largest AIM company is registered in the Isle Of Man.
Pays 0% Corporation Tax.

Just saying...

It has to be observed however that Switzerland have done something EEA-like by agreeing numerous bilateral deals with the EU that subject it to EU law and freedom of movement, so the 1992 claim hasn't necessarily been disproved.

True, although it has to be obvious that any bilateral agreement will imply the UK subjecting itself to EU regulations in that policy field in order to get such concessions, and while I personally am fine with that, any Brexiter has to accept it will be a betrayal of Vote Leave's arguments in the referendum.

"Many economists". Obviously another garbage statement that cannot be proven.

The difference is that Brexit caused a 20 percent depreciation in the pound and a cut in growth. We could have been certain of that before.

*I simply said jobs have been moved. Banks have already started applying for regulatory licences within the EU. Those are facts


That doesn't mean entire banking operations are moving or whatever *


Nothing sensationalist

Quite simple

No access to the single market without free movement.

That also includes passporting for all financial institutions not just insurance companies *