If you voted remain are you starting to feel a little silly now.
[Link]

Their arrogance won't allow it.

As for Lagarde n co, constantly revising their predictions is what the IMF does best so this shouldn't be a surprise.

Buy Litecoin.

It's actually worrying that the IMF have changed their mind. When was the last time they got any forecast right?

It's the same with Mark Carney and almost every other economist. They speak with great authority yet their arrogance challenges anyone to disagree with them.

One of the main problems with economists, bankers, politicians and other policy makers is that, since the Financial Crisis of 2008, the world changed. Yet most of this group went to university during the era that myself and most of this group grew up, in the period between 1980 and 2008 which was a freak period fuelled only by unlimited credit. But to them it was the norm.

Having learned the same stuff from the same books and the same professors at their universities (be it Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, Harvard, Yale etc) they still believe it to be true. Again, their arrogance prevents them from considering that they're wrong (and all that they learned is wrong). If you ever hear anyone saying that they are forecasting that interest rates are "normalising", dismiss their opinion immediately as they are talking about what they see as normal, not what is normal today. They've had 11 years to get used to it after all.

Living down here does have some advantages. At least you can see them cry.

I am not suggesting any kind of censorship let alone a "Ministry of Truth" which would be a total authoritarian nightmare. The idea of any government deciding what is true is an anathema to me. To suggest I am in favour of such an idea is a complete misrepresentation, which is unfortunately a common occurrence from the poster who made it.

Films and documentaries are careful not to make accusations about real people that are untrue. If they seek to make specific points then then will do so with fictional characters. Like media outlets they have lawyers checking facts before release and the media has editorial controls and standards as well as regulatory authorities providing oversight. They do this to avoid being sued for damages.

The social media companies are in a totally different position. Anything can be posted anonymously but presented in a way to appear as though it is "news". There is no editorial or legal oversight and no opportunity for any damaged party to sue for damages. Clearly this offers huge opportunities to those with particular viewpoints to spread their messages without any regard for the truth. This is propaganda on fire.

The companies do take it seriously and are doing things to attempt to mitigate the worst of the impact, despite the squeals from those who think that anything and everything ought to be allowed on their platforms. Which are, of course, THEIR platforms and not just public spaces. I heard Nick Clegg on this subject only a day or two ago.

My own view is that much more needs to be done to ensure that any attempt by malign forces to poison the well of public opinion, and informed debate, is stopped in it's tracks. Open debate and the exchange of diametrically opposed opinion is healthy in a free society. Propaganda designed to misinform by those who wish to destroy our way of life is not.

I don't have the answers but I do think there is a serious problem that cannot be ignored.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Which is all well and good but ultimately it was rubbish, displaying a shocking level of ignorance about history.

And I quote...

"The dismantling by the United States of the British empire, after its finest hour in 1940, was a traumatic blow to the psyche of two English generations, from which they have never recovered, largely because they have never recognised it."

WTF? Seriously? The Empire was allowed to effectively disintegrate because we were skint. World War 2 did that to us, on top of the cost of the first one and all because the Germans did not know how to play nicely. And ironically, wanted their own Empire.

Is there an unanswered question about the role of English nation-hood in the coming years? Undoubtedly. But this notion that a desire for Empire drove us to leave the warm embrace of the European Union is simply beyond belief.

We voted to leave it because, in the main, we are simply not willing to go any further with the European project. That we do not want European, or any others for that matter, politicians to have any kind of veto over what the UK might or might not do.

And the reality is that nations such as Scotland and Ireland are dependent on England. For its markets, for its institutions and a whole host of other areas of human life that mean it makes far more sense for us all to be linked through a political and economic union. We dwarf them in almost every conceivable way.

Along with sharing a common language and heritage.

An independent Scotland that voted for that reality based on a desire to be part of the European Union rather than the United one it is at the moment would be insanity beyond comprehension. Does it even have a direct ferry link to the EU? I think there are possible plans for a daily ferry to the Netherlands but beyond that?

I am more than happy for both N Ireland and Scotland to have referendums on their independence but I simply cannot see any rational reason for either to succeed beyond the sort of ludicrous BS about 'Empire' written about in that article.

Why would being part of an 'Empire' run from Brussels be better for either than one ran from Westminster? Because that is the ultimate choice.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Except for the fact that the entire Eurozone is dependent on German exports. Which thanks to the Euro, are cheaper than they would be if priced in DM's. And the Euro is kept weak by ensuring that the southern European economies are effectively kept poor. The normal economic fluctuations simply do not apply to how the Eurozone operates.

And if Germany is struggling to export its cars and kitchen appliances then it needs to weaken the Euro even more. Meaning it needs the Italian, Spanish and Greek economies to stagnate. That is the catch 22 of the entire single currency project and why it was, is and will be for the foreseeable future, economic insanity driven by nothing more than political hubris.

Lunacy on a level that is truly difficult to comprehend.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.