Why is rilla so pro UK remaining in the EU? Does it actually matter to you more than political interest?
06-26-2016 12:27 PM
#376
| |
Why is rilla so pro UK remaining in the EU? Does it actually matter to you more than political interest? | |
| |
06-26-2016 12:33 PM
#377
| |
|
I know you think a million is a big number but as I said that's why we use percentages. If you're talking about over 33 million votes then 1 million is a very small amount. If you're talking about the UK population as a whole it's even smaller. |
06-26-2016 12:45 PM
#378
| |
I can't. Their only expansion ideas are those who where Russian speaking people are dominant, and where it is locally welcome. If you think Crimea is an example of an expansionist state, then I guess you had chicken pox when they were teaching 1930's Germany at school. Crimea was a cultural property of Russia's, and they were within their rights to take it because the people who live there wanted it. | |
| |
06-26-2016 12:46 PM
#379
| |
Ok I don't care if you think it's close or if I'm wrong to think it wasn't because it makes literally not the slightest bit of difference. It wasn't close enough to be questionable in terms of integrity. I can't be fucked to argue about what "close" means to us both. | |
| |
06-26-2016 01:02 PM
#380
| |
|
how the remain camp feel |
06-26-2016 01:44 PM
#381
| |
What stops the EU from trying to stick it to England beside England just being so great that no one would ever do that? | |
Last edited by a500lbgorilla; 06-26-2016 at 01:55 PM. | |
06-26-2016 01:44 PM
#382
| |
| |
06-26-2016 01:50 PM
#383
| |
Plus | |
| |
06-26-2016 02:08 PM
#384
| |
| |
06-26-2016 02:11 PM
#385
| |
Yes yes, I completely get your point. Without touching the completely arbitrary figures you used, certainly a risk-based assessment can be made to ensure excess resources aren't used to make something "too" secure/safe, and that money can be used more effectively somewhere else. The thing is, how do you ensure the risk-based assessment is performed and the excess funds get used for similar safety measures somewhere else and not just dividends, without regulations or central management? | |
| |
06-26-2016 02:18 PM
#386
| |
| |
06-26-2016 02:22 PM
#387
| |
| |
06-26-2016 02:25 PM
#388
| |
| |
06-26-2016 02:44 PM
#389
| |
| |
06-26-2016 02:55 PM
#390
| |
The way they treat their own people and the way the view the world makes them someone I don't want to be too heavily reliant upon. | |
| |
06-26-2016 05:56 PM
#391
| |
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36637037 |
06-26-2016 10:31 PM
#392
| |
|
Yeah, go with the most efficient. |
06-26-2016 10:47 PM
#393
| |
|
The EU getting "the better" of it against the UK would make things even worse for the EU. The UK is not nearly as vulnerable economically as the EU. If the EU and UK go to war, the UK would have some tough years (maybe), but the EU would face total collapse since its economy is on such a weak foundation as is. |
06-26-2016 11:15 PM
#394
| |
The EU is ridiculously fucked, and the UK wanted out, which is rational enough. | |
| |
06-27-2016 02:57 AM
#395
| |
| |
06-27-2016 03:27 AM
#396
| |
06-27-2016 04:39 AM
#397
| |
| |
06-27-2016 04:47 AM
#398
| |
Your whole point was that if we have less safety here, we can have more safety elsewhere, for cheaper. That's in no way guaranteed though, and quite possible we end up with less safety. Free markets do not guarantee safety, safety regulations guarantee safety. | |
| |
06-27-2016 06:05 AM
#399
| |
| |
06-27-2016 06:19 AM
#400
| |
Heh, fair point. But the next 2 paragraphs were quite important. | |
| |
06-27-2016 08:37 AM
#401
| |
| |
Last edited by Savy; 06-27-2016 at 08:41 AM. | |
06-27-2016 01:59 PM
#402
| |
|
In that situation, there is known greater opportunity cost of safety by going with the 200k bridges. |
06-27-2016 02:52 PM
#403
| |
I guess the one silver lining of brexit is the financial disaster that looks likely to follow will at least prove Wufwugy wrong. | |
| |
06-27-2016 03:00 PM
#404
| |
| |
06-27-2016 03:32 PM
#405
| |
We're talking about the same wufwugy, right? | |
06-27-2016 05:20 PM
#406
| |
The UK voting to leave the EU would make things even worse for the UK. Yet here we are. You can't pretend that only the UK are the clever players nor can you pretend that this was an expected event that is properly realigning the relationship between the EU and the UK. | |
| |
06-27-2016 05:29 PM
#407
| |
| |
06-27-2016 05:31 PM
#408
| |
| |
06-27-2016 05:32 PM
#409
| |
I'm still saltier than my salt shaker. | |
| |
06-27-2016 05:40 PM
#410
| |
|
The economics I discuss is the economics I've learned from economists. |
06-27-2016 06:14 PM
#411
| |
|
Fighting hurts them both. From what I know about economics, if there was a fight, the EU would suffer more because it is in a more exposed and vulnerable economic position. The reasons are many that include things like the UK being an optimal currency area while the EU not being one. The UK has many money tools that the EU does not. These tools are extremely important, and they are the main reason why the UK has performed better than the EU over the last several years. |
Last edited by wufwugy; 06-27-2016 at 06:17 PM. | |
06-27-2016 06:23 PM
#412
| |
|
There are also political cases to be made for the EU, not necessarily economic ones even though they're ones some economists like. Probably the best example is that the dominant strategy for trade each country has is very unpopular to voters. Even though economists would prefer there to be no trade deals and instead unilateral deregulation (all it would take is one big economy to do it and the rest would fall over themselves to follow), they do not believe this is politically feasible. |
06-27-2016 10:23 PM
#413
| |
|
|
06-27-2016 11:03 PM
#414
| |
edit: had a harsh toned post here aimed at wufwugy. was unnecessary. carry on... | |
Last edited by rpm; 06-28-2016 at 12:24 AM. | |
06-28-2016 12:49 AM
#415
| |
2 Trillion in stock value lost at this point. | |
| |
06-28-2016 01:46 AM
#416
| |
Im now imagining a diabolical machine literally taking $166 from every person. | |
06-28-2016 07:19 AM
#417
| |
It's bullshit money anyway. | |
| |
06-28-2016 08:16 AM
#418
| |
I don't understand why people are saying it was a vote for independence or sovereignty. | |
06-28-2016 08:47 AM
#419
| |
| |
| |
06-28-2016 09:49 AM
#420
| |
I think you're talking about autonomy, not sovereignty. I'd say it's nothing like slavery, but a lot like marriage. You enter it freely and willingly, but in order to make it work you need to make some compromises and allow your partner into the decision-making, at least in theory in a healthy relationship. If you feel like the compromises are not worth the gains you get from the relationship, divorce may be a good option. It just seems like 52% of Britons were not exactly aware of what a marriage is, and that they won't be getting any after they break up. | |
| |
06-28-2016 02:18 PM
#421
| |
| |
06-28-2016 09:42 PM
#422
| |
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise that refusing to work meant I wasn't entitled to an opinion when it comes to economics. I suppose I shouldn't have even been allowed to vote on the matter. I'll just disappear under a rock somewhere until this all blows over. | |
| |
06-28-2016 11:33 PM
#423
| |
Seems to be driven by fear of war. | |
Last edited by !Luck; 06-29-2016 at 08:46 AM. | |
06-29-2016 12:07 AM
#424
| |
|
Yes. Granted, the case should still be made that the US military prevent(s)ed war. Without some military at the helm, Russia would have taken over the entire continent. |
06-29-2016 12:18 AM
#425
| |
|
Since I always say "economists this, economists that" and since I care about giving every view a fair shake: economists by large were against Leave. It wasn't that they thought Brexit was bad, but that they found various reasons why in this particular case, they preferred staying. Obviously, I have been disagreeing with this. It's not that I think their reasons are wrong, but that by net I think Brexit is better. |
06-29-2016 12:27 AM
#426
| |
|
There is a sense of ever fleeting sovereignty. It's similar to what has been happening in the US over the decades. Our federal government is just getting more and more powerful, intervening in more and more ways. Some people don't like appeals to the Founding Fathers, but I think it's important. They would be tornado-ing in their graves if they saw what our federal government has become. |
06-29-2016 12:38 AM
#427
| |
|
For Rilla, the EU engages in serious protectionist trade policies. Pulled from an article: |
06-29-2016 01:41 AM
#428
| |
|
I'm confused, the majority of immigration from europe isn't muslim. Care to go into what you mean more specifically? |
06-29-2016 02:32 AM
#429
| |
|
It can be said that mid-single digits is pretty high. Blacks make up only 13% of the US population, and look at all the related so-called problems we have. Regardless, this is about perceptions. The perception is that interlopers are taking over the UK. I think the perception has merit because it is at least partially true, but more importantly the perception causes political instability. |
Last edited by wufwugy; 06-29-2016 at 02:58 AM. | |
06-29-2016 02:38 AM
#430
| |
|
I should rephrase: trade barriers and tariffs don't actually favor the EU at the expense of others. They favor a handful of special interests within the EU at the expense of the rest of those in the EU and the world. For example, if a country has tariffs on imported steel, it is only some of the steel workers that benefit while everybody else, including the domestic, suffers. |
Last edited by wufwugy; 06-29-2016 at 02:57 AM. | |
06-29-2016 08:20 AM
#431
| |
Why do you make these hyperbolic statements? | |
06-29-2016 08:23 AM
#432
| |
I appreciate a good appeal to the FF, but I think any blanket statement about what the FF thought or felt is ridiculous. They were not a single-minded group who agreed on things. They disagreed on just about everything. | |
06-29-2016 10:17 AM
#433
| |
The government of today has no right to tell us how to live our lives, because the government of 200 years ago already did! | |
06-29-2016 03:43 PM
#434
| |
Nice post by rilla. | |
06-29-2016 05:18 PM
#435
| |
Maybe, I'm just thinking through the negotiations and I expect the Brits to be forced into a game of brinksmanship with redlines and hard initial demands and I'm wondering what happens if the EU tries to win. America has enjoyed the kooky fun of chicken that can arise from public mandates to tear the bandages off. | |
Last edited by a500lbgorilla; 06-29-2016 at 05:22 PM. | |
06-29-2016 05:19 PM
#436
| |
Austerity is already biting pretty hard. They've been trying to take the right of benefits away from people for years, but there's only so much they can do. I think there's around a million on jobseekers allowance alone. Sure, if you take all that money away, then you'll save quite a lot. £50m-odd a week, in fact. However, the number of people on the dole who are potentially productive is much lower than people like to think. The majority are incapable, let alone unwilling, of finding long-term employment, so you'll just end up with a ton of selfish and unintelligent people desperate for money, which is not a good recipe for a healthy society. Government knows this, which is why benefits remain available for people like me. | |
| |
06-29-2016 05:29 PM
#437
| |
I can't really read this kind of stuff, I'll be honest. Like I've said before, if I was in a position of making the tough decisions, I'd have diverse and able advisors and I'd try to figure out how they think, but I work in an industry that is highly regulated - there are redundant national and international standards for safety and design which we must always address in specifications, design, testing, and implementation. They're a hassle, add huge costs, slow projects way down, but they're obviously needed to make sure that every design is forced to learn from the mistakes of past systems. So that no hot-shots can possibly under-bid, over-promise and put into the field anything that would actually endanger lives. (Note that hot-shots do under-bid and over-promise as a method to keep work coming in to maintain their design teams) | |
| |
06-29-2016 05:53 PM
#438
| |
On tariffs and stuff though, it's interesting to notice the different trade wars going on like Saudis -v- US on oil or China -v- US on steel. | |
| |
06-29-2016 06:10 PM
#439
| |
Wondered when this would turn up: | |
06-29-2016 06:23 PM
#440
| |
Always enjoy reading about DOW. Reminds me a little bit of where I work (publisher). We have to be careful in making sure that sales agents aren't buying our products up in bulk in Europe and selling them direct to our US customers at a discount. Reason being that the USD list price to the U.S. market is always about 20% higher than the GBP*exchange rate price. | |
06-29-2016 06:31 PM
#441
| |
It's no secret that identical textbooks are much cheaper in India and China than in the USA. | |
06-29-2016 06:57 PM
#442
| |
|
The farther off the authority, the more centralized (beyond a point), the more monopolized, and the less dependent on free choice of producers and consumers -- the less efficient the regulations. |
06-29-2016 07:27 PM
#443
| |
|
It's a colloquialism. Perhaps it's not that common among academics, but the colloquialism is that when somebody says "none" or "all," he doesn't actually mean "none" or "all." |
06-29-2016 07:45 PM
#444
| |
mojo is more pedantic than I am, and that's saying something. | |
| |
06-29-2016 08:23 PM
#445
| |
| |
06-29-2016 10:19 PM
#446
| |
|
Quality article on the euro: http://www.vox.com/2016/6/29/1205249...-euro-disaster |
06-29-2016 10:27 PM
#447
| |
|
Not read the article you posted, if it answers my question just let me know to read it. |
Last edited by Savy; 06-29-2016 at 10:29 PM. | |
06-29-2016 10:31 PM
#448
| |
|
A comment by Lars Christensen (a well-known economist in the blogosphere) in a Sumner post I'm reading: |
06-29-2016 10:47 PM
#449
| |
|
The article briefly addresses this only in part: |
06-29-2016 10:48 PM
#450
| |
I'm more optimistic this will be positive or neutral at worst. No facts to support this assertion, maybe personal disposition or naivety. | |