This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
DanH SW2 11 Oct 16 1.24pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stuk
There were, and there are, no facts on either side. It's all bulls***. Where's the higher interest rates, lower house prices, mass unemployment and all that we were told would follow a vote to leave? I know I'm repeating myself, but I feel like it needs stating as often as necessary; but Brexit hasn't even bloody started yet. And in any case, even if it had, markets take months and months, if not years, to fully adjust to changes in market conditions.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Part Time James 11 Oct 16 1.27pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by DanH
I know I'm repeating myself, but I feel like it needs stating as often as necessary; but Brexit hasn't even bloody started yet. And in any case, even if it had, markets take months and months, if not years, to fully adjust to changes in market conditions. I believe he is suggesting that these things were proclaimed would happen after a "vote to leave" not after proceedings began. I think you'll find we've had a vote to leave already. I don't disagree with anything you've said, but Stuk's post didn't say "post-Brexit", he is saying that the experts told us they'd happen "post-vote".
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
DanH SW2 11 Oct 16 1.30pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Part Time James
I believe he is suggesting that these things were proclaimed would happen after a "vote to leave" not after proceedings began. I think you'll find we've had a vote to leave already. I don't disagree with anything you've said, but Stuk's post didn't say "post-Brexit", he is saying that the experts told us they'd happen "post-vote". I agree with his point that there was a load of bullsh*t on each side and both campaigns were cringeworthy and patronising in their approaches. A lot of what is keeping the economy ticking along is the depressed value of the pound. That's good for a short term stimulus but won't do any good in the long run. Anyway, this thread is about the US elections, let's not derail it. Donald Trump; what a prick.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stuk Top half 11 Oct 16 1.51pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Part Time James
I believe he is suggesting that these things were proclaimed would happen after a "vote to leave" not after proceedings began. I think you'll find we've had a vote to leave already. I don't disagree with anything you've said, but Stuk's post didn't say "post-Brexit", he is saying that the experts told us they'd happen "post-vote". Precisely. We were going to be at war by now according to some of them.
Optimistic as ever |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stuk Top half 11 Oct 16 1.53pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by DanH
I agree with his point that there was a load of bullsh*t on each side and both campaigns were cringeworthy and patronising in their approaches. A lot of what is keeping the economy ticking along is the depressed value of the pound. That's good for a short term stimulus but won't do any good in the long run. Anyway, this thread is about the US elections, let's not derail it. Donald Trump; what a prick. In terms of hitting inflation targets it probably will. I agree that we're nowhere near the end game yet, not even close. "The Donald". Where the f*** did that come from and why do morons use/say it? No wonder Kanye West thinks he has a chance in the future with this shambles of an election.
Optimistic as ever |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
twist Miami, Florida 11 Oct 16 2.47pm | |
---|---|
What Brexit and Trump have done, is give both establishments massive wakeup calls. On the European side there are grumblings from many countries populace, to follow Britain out of Europe. On the USA side, politicians are waking up to the fact that a large portion of the country are willing to elect this bozo purely on the basis that they are tired of the current establishment and that ANYTHING is better than current. If Ross Perot were running, i think he might have won. Trump would be an absolute disaster for this county, but even i am wondering if its worth it just to shock up congress. No, i had my 15 seconds of insanity, its not worth it.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Ray in Houston Houston 11 Oct 16 3.21pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Sportyteacher
Is it not just the case that the ordinary American is under-represented with both Trump and Clinton's nominations proving how wealth and indeed corruption can buy them power? Actually, you've got two different - and unacceptable - elements of American politics on display here: 1) Trump is a classic example of there being one set of rules for the rich and one for everyone else. He has benefited immensely from subsidies and tax breaks and, when the s*** hit the fan, he was allowed to walk away from his debts and obligations while maintaining his personal wealth. That's an option not available to the rest of us - just try and tell your credit card company that you're not going to pay off your balance but you're going to keep all the stuff you bought with their money. 2) The Clintons didn't grow up dirt poor, but they're from a distinctly middle class background but were fortunate enough to be able to go to law school. Through a career in politics, they have amassed substantial personal wealth, which is amazing given the (relatively) paltry salaries paid for even the top jobs in public service (POTUS pays $400,000/year). But it's not like they're particularly unusual - if you're a member of Congress and not at least a millionaire, then you're either new, stupid, or Bernie Sanders. The ability of public servants to make money off their jobs is at a level that would be legislated to death if it were in the private sector. Insider trading is absolutely legal for politicians and absolutely practiced to manufacture the enormous personal wealth we see among our public "servants". Why else would you spend a $1 billion to get a job that pays $400,000? The whole thing is as corrupt as arseholes.
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Ray in Houston Houston 11 Oct 16 3.29pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by jamiemartin721
The upside however of Trump winning is that its going to likely end up in some kind of impeachment resignation, or series of issues that spectacularly backfire - which certainly will be more amusing. If Trump wins, it means that Democrats didn't vote, which means that the Republicans will retain control of Congress. Only a Democratic minority in the Senate would stand between the country and a full-on, Randian rewrite. Trump won't stop Congress and Congress won't stop Trump.
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Ray in Houston Houston 11 Oct 16 3.31pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stuk
There were, and there are, no facts on either side. It's all bulls***. Where's the higher interest rates, lower house prices, mass unemployment and all that we were told would follow a vote to leave? You haven't left yet.
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stuk Top half 11 Oct 16 3.44pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
Actually, you've got two different - and unacceptable - elements of American politics on display here: 1) Trump is a classic example of there being one set of rules for the rich and one for everyone else. He has benefited immensely from subsidies and tax breaks and, when the s*** hit the fan, he was allowed to walk away from his debts and obligations while maintaining his personal wealth. That's an option not available to the rest of us - just try and tell your credit card company that you're not going to pay off your balance but you're going to keep all the stuff you bought with their money. 2) The Clintons didn't grow up dirt poor, but they're from a distinctly middle class background but were fortunate enough to be able to go to law school. Through a career in politics, they have amassed substantial personal wealth, which is amazing given the (relatively) paltry salaries paid for even the top jobs in public service (POTUS pays 0,000/year). But it's not like they're particularly unusual - if you're a member of Congress and not at least a millionaire, then you're either new, stupid, or Bernie Sanders. The ability of public servants to make money off their jobs is at a level that would be legislated to death if it were in the private sector. Insider trading is absolutely legal for politicians and absolutely practiced to manufacture the enormous personal wealth we see among our public "servants". Why else would you spend a $1 billion to get a job that pays $400,000? The whole thing is as corrupt as arseholes.
Optimistic as ever |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stuk Top half 11 Oct 16 3.45pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
You haven't left yet. This has already been covered by PTJ. We were told this would happen post vote, not post leaving.
Optimistic as ever |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Ray in Houston Houston 11 Oct 16 3.49pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stuk
This has already been covered by PTJ. We were told this would happen post vote, not post leaving. You were also told that they would take the 350 million quid saved from the EU and spend it on the NHS. How did that work out?
We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.