MP details please

[Mischa]

Waking up again to a long list of large companies looking to relocate out of the UK, and both the Tories and Labour in meltdown with nobody stepping up to fill the huge void, I feel I need to do something to feel less powerless and I know I'm not alone. Businesses can't wait for months, they will be filing applications to relocate as we speak.

Does anyone know the best MPs to contact and have any email addresses?

[bonaome]

you should probably have a look at this

http://www.helenhayes.org.uk/eu_referendum_result_reaction

[Green Goose]

Mischa Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Waking up again to a long list of large companies

> looking to relocate out of the UK, and both the

> Tories and Labour in meltdown with nobody stepping

> up to fill the huge void, I feel I need to do

> something to feel less powerless and I know I'm

> not alone. Businesses can't wait for months, they

> will be filing applications to relocate as we

> speak.

> Does anyone know the best MPs to contact and have

> any email addresses?

Calm down Dear. No need to try and stir up panic.

Nothing much will change after Brexit. The stock market has recovered completely from the dip this week and Sterling is coming back up nicely also.

Here are two questions for you........

1. Do you have a business?

2. Did you actually vote in the referendum/

GG

[midivydale]

Green Goose, abit patronising dont you think? There are some heart breaking consequences for alot of people.

[Lordship 516]

Yes GG - this affects us all. Every job lost means 4 more jobs in total unsupported. Read the multiplier principle in your economics text book & you will learn about direct impact, indirect impact & induced impacts, not to mention what is known as 'stickiness' - once you attract the right type of jobs they tend to stay long term as they don't wish to leave well trained staff behind.

Other countries are hunting as we chat ! Once gone they can never be attracted back, mostly due to stickiness at another location.

Not sure what to call this Brexit economics - Borisonomics, Govenomics or Faragonomics - ignorant louts the lot of them !

I have another word for it but I fear I would be banned on here if I used it - it ends in 'x' with two 'o's somewhere

[Lordship 516]

It gets worse - as 5 jobs will result in greater income for the exchequer through income tax, National Insurance & extra Vat on goods & services [from increased spending], there is also the added premium of less welfare being distributed or leaving more money available for more needy services such as the NHS. This has a serious effect on the national budget. Most of the spending is distributed locally which adds to the feelgood factor and this reduces crime, improves education, health & general welfare. It all documented, so no need to dismiss this issue as a temporary blip that can be recovered from - every FDI job lost is usually gone forever - at least 25 years.

[Loz]

Green Goose Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Nothing much will change after Brexit. The stock market has recovered completely from the dip this

> week and Sterling is coming back up nicely also.

The FTSE100 has. The FTSE250 - which is a better reflection of UK companies - is still well down.

The pound is still in the toilet - at a 30 year low against the USD. On what planet is it 'coming up nicely'??

[Lordship 516]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Green Goose Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > Nothing much will change after Brexit. The stock

> market has recovered completely from the dip this

> > week and Sterling is coming back up nicely

> also.

>

> The FTSE100 has. The FTSE250 - which is a better

> reflection of UK companies - is still well down.

>

>

> The pound is still in the toilet - at a 30 year

> low against the USD. On what planet is it 'coming

> up nicely'??

Planet Farage with its two moons Borisconi & Gove Minimus

[????]

It's just the uncertainty - things will improve. Borrowing costs have shrunk, we'll get some stimulus via monetary policy, the FTSE is at a 10 month high, there has been some recovery in the FTSE 250, a low pound benefit exporters; will there be a recession next year that wouldn't have happened probably and that will be painful (and for The rest of Europe too) but I really don't think the sky will fall in medium term. We imported ?250 billion of European goods in the first quarter - the EU wants that back up and running; we were the main engine of job creation for Europe- the Southern European economies don't want a boost to their domestic unemployment rates - it's all messy but it'll sort out without being quite as catastrophic as some would have. The govt has also given itself some room now to apply a bit of good old keynsyan pumping if it wants too. Cheer up.

[Lordship 516]

Hi ????

Am personally very cheerful & comfortable - however, it is always a given that things will improve, even after 1929 - it's just a question of when, some people can wait it out but many people will suffer in the meantime. I don't see any conditions whereby this will improve anytime soon & I am talking about 2 to 4 years & up to 10 years. Many people, including dealers & politicians appear to think that the only cost of money is the interest rate. For an economy & even a company there are many more costs involved in borrowing. There is a risk of depreciation [both physical & financial] once that money has been converted into goods or intangibles. There are also exchange losses that can result. Uncertainty will exacerbate all these. Stimulus coupled with rising unemployment & inflation is a toxic mix and this is where political uncertainty is the detonator that will cause stagnation. Once stagnation takes hold it takes years to shake off - ask anyone who was around in the 70s or any Japanese banker. I think this is where we are headed for in the medium term and it was entirely avoidable. No point pumping if the banks won't/can't lend, companies won't/can't borrow, households stop spending - this all spells disaster for growth. Without growth there will be a contraction. All economists bar the looney ones will tell you likewise. The UK is a significant market for Europe but they can get by without us, they'll catch a cold [nominal GDP 10 trillion Euro, EU exports to UK = 3% of their GDP or 12% of their exports, not negligible but not so dramatic either. Individual countries & companies might suffer but here are support mechanisms to cover that - we cannot get by without them in the medium term,the EU takes about 45% of our exports & most of it can be substituted from elsewhere - we will have a bad dose of the flu. We export $501million of bovine meat to the EU but Ireland can make that up easily as they export $913million of bovine meat to the UK & they will chase these markets aggressively [probably doing it now], with support of the EU & the Irish Government. Any traditional markets lost are usually lost forever. Politicians need to examine the practical detail before they face up to the EU. We don't hold such a good hand as people might like you to think. We need a deal & we need it sooner rather than later. Unfortunately for us all, it appear that it will be much later. Was it worth it ? Only time can tell, but I think not.

[????]

Lordship I'll get back later more considered but just one Cut & paste about the trade thing as an EG:

The U.K. is by far Germany's most profitable export market. Last year, Germany's trade surplus with the U.K. came in at 51 billion euros ($56 billion), accounting for 34 percent of the German surplus with the EU. That surplus was also 42 percent higher than the German trade surplus with France, Berlin's largest European trade partner.

With its 89.3 billion euro worth of exports to the U.K. last year, Britain is Germany's third-largest export market, after the U.S. and France.

Will Germany give this up by shutting the U.K. out of a free-trade agreement with the EU? Of course it won't.

And here is another interesting story. You probably heard the Germans boasting about their booming China trade. Here is how booming that is: Last year, German exports to the U.K. were 25 percent higher than its sales to China. The big difference being that Germans made a huge surplus with the U.K., but their China trade recorded a 20 billion euro deficit ? a fourfold increase from the deficit in 2014.

No wonder that Chancellor Merkel keeps saying that there is no need to be "nasty" with the U.K., while reassuring her compatriots that she would negotiate the U.K.'s exit from the EU with a great attention to German interests.

[Lordship 516]

Hi ????

I am not suggesting that the EU or individual countries will want to shut out the UK or be unnecessarily tough with us; however, those people who are saying that the UK has a stronger card are in cloud cuckoo land. The other problems we will suffer more from than the EU are uncertainty & time. The macro conditions are against us and the volatility will affect us more than the EU. The politicians appear not to understand this - no point in playing hardball with people who have most of the cards. Even if a deal is done that is suitable to both sides, the timing will hurt the UK much more than the EU. They have much more critical mass & flexibility. Their GDP 10 trillion Euro; ours 2.6 billion Euro. There is a need to engage in a mutually advantageous trade deal without histrionics or side issues. Movement of people, goods, capital & services will have to be on a mutual basis also & this will be difficult to square with the aspirations of the Brexiteers. I was at a private event today where a very eminent lady [EU committee chairperson] participated and her take was that what will transpire in the end won't be anything like what the Brexiteers imagine, hinting that the UK will end up with what we have now but with the immigration element moderated somewhat and applying to all of the EU. However, the UK will cease to have influence in the various institutions for the future.

[Lordship 516]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lordship I'll get back later more considered but

> just one Cut & paste about the trade thing as an

> EG:

>

> The U.K. is by far Germany's most profitable

> export market. Last year, Germany's trade surplus

> with the U.K. came in at 51 billion euros ($56

> billion), accounting for 34 percent of the German

> surplus with the EU. That surplus was also 42

> percent higher than the German trade surplus with

> France, Berlin's largest European trade partner.

>

> With its 89.3 billion euro worth of exports to the

> U.K. last year, Britain is Germany's third-largest

> export market, after the U.S. and France.

>

> Will Germany give this up by shutting the U.K. out

> of a free-trade agreement with the EU? Of course

> it won't.

>

> And here is another interesting story. You

> probably heard the Germans boasting about their

> booming China trade. Here is how booming that is:

> Last year, German exports to the U.K. were 25

> percent higher than its sales to China. The big

> difference being that Germans made a huge surplus

> with the U.K., but their China trade recorded a 20

> billion euro deficit ? a fourfold increase from

> the deficit in 2014.

>

> No wonder that Chancellor Merkel keeps saying that

> there is no need to be "nasty" with the U.K.,

> while reassuring her compatriots that she would

> negotiate the U.K.'s exit from the EU with a great

> attention to German interests.

Segments of industries in individual countries will suffer but this is asymmetric. For these issues in EU countries it will have a limited micro effect but got the UK it will do macro damage. Europe has many ways out and has trade treaties already in place - the UK has not. Individual EU countries can substitute UK supply with supply from within the EU whch will at the same time absorb cut-off UK demand for another UK country [see bovine meat example above] & also supply & demand possibly at a better price from third countries. The UK will be in survival mode for many years, making do with whatever they can get by way of either supply or demand. So there is more pressure on the UK & grandstanding like Gove & co are posturing just will not work. The EU is a very organized, sophisticated operating organism and it will just roll over the UK if we adopt a tough stance. The fact is we are in trouble & we need as many friends as we can get, including the EU.

[????]

Sophisticated operating machine - bloody hell you are having a laugh. Ask Southern European youth what they think of that. US, India and Australia have approached us already. I think you're getting supply and demand mixed up - Germany can't miraculously substitute it's massive trade surplus with us with 3rd world countries or from within the EU. You can't say here's 300,000 VWs we need you to buy off us Italy (on top of the ones you already do) as the UK's dropped out. Bizzarre logic. We have a strong position and compromises will be made with the ever pragmatic Germans . Countries like Ireland absolutely need to trade with us. We'll get EU lite with less say internally, some limits on movement of people and more opportunities that we can make on our own. I voted remain, but they'll miss us as much as we'll miss them and the sky won't fall in is my view- unnecessary recession next year looks likely but Armageddon, no.

[????]

Plus the volatility is more problematic for EUropan banks than us - Italian bank especially, but Deutchbank looking wobbly

[Loz]

Who blinks first in this negotiation might give us an insight into Brexit negotiations.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/03/eu-swiss-single-market-access-no-free-movement-citizens

[jaywalker]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> the FTSE is at a 10

> month high

indeed, where do you put your money if the UK is facing a severe recession? The FTSE 100 is mainly multinationals whose income base is NOT in the UK and heavily weighted to dollars (so the extraordinary fall in sterling benefits them). Have a look at graphs for share prices of companies constrained by the UK market and then say if you are still sanguine.

[????]

No sh1t Sherlock. I mentioned the FTSE 250 too as having made some recovery but being down. There's just a bunch of negative sentiment at first it was look at the FTSE and now when it's at a 8 month high people are saying well that international - changed from the story a week on Friday. I need to stress again I voted remain, I think we'll have a recession but there's plenty of sound argument that it won't be the catastrophe that many people think. Three were so,e very similar arguments around not joining the Euro; similar argument were put up when Switzerland voted not to join in the early 99s too. None of us know but I think it will sort itself out ok - or certainly there is a very good chance it will.

[Lordship 516]

????

I take it you are not an economist ? or, if you are, you haven't done much modelling ? If you had like I have been doing for the last 10 days you would get quite a fright - no scenario looks too pretty & I have run many using the treasury model, the Oxford model & the LSE model. I ignore the CBI model as it is not comprehensive enough. I have tested these upside down & inside out running models 24 hours a day & in particular for existing clients who have already made business decisions or narrowed options using the analysis. Modelling is not the be-all & end-all but it does give reasonable indications about what will happen under differing scenarios. When you factor in the time-lag due to negotiation the result looks very ugly for the UK but the scenario for most of the EU is not as bad as that for the UK.

Your attitude parallels Gove & Co's and is not conducive to good business or negotiation. Sure 'they' would miss us but not as much as we will miss them. They would find it difficult to find substitute markets for the VWs, BMs & Mercs but so also would we for the Range Rovers & Jags etc. They have their trade treaties in place, we do not. Of course the US, Australia, India & even Ireland have already approached the UK making nice noises but treaties take time that we cannot afford the luxury of.

Take the case of Ireland - the UK exports about 6 billion Euro of goods & services to Ireland & imports about 20 billion euro worth of good & services. On first examination Ireland looks vulnerable but when examined in detail you will see that many of the exports from Ireland are unique - pharmaceuticals, software, orthopedic & medical instruments - the UK needs these and cannot source them elsewhere. On the other hand most of the UK exports can be sourced from within Ireland or the EU. If we lose even that little market it will be gone forever whereas Ireland will have a bit of a tough time but as they have shown since 2008 they are a resilient bunch and will prosper without us. I know these people well and they will just buckle down and work their way through the problem.

Just look at the German attitude to young Britons in Germany - they are offering full citizenship; on the other hand UK politicians are threatening to deport EU citizens. The nasty party at work again.

We need to get off our high horse & either relent to remain or else do a mutually suitable trade deal with Europe fast. We have a little over 2 tears but in the meantime it will be hardship for many - not Armageddon but many will suffer and this was avoidable. However, stagflation will happen - all the ingredients have been put in place by default and there is little that can reverse that.

[????]

Was that the modelling that failed to predict the financial crisis in 2008 - whereas as some more observational economist called it right? was that the Modelling that in the late 80s said the Yen was about to become the global currency and Japan would overtake the US in the early 90s. Modelling is flawed because it tries to rationalise irrational behaviour, tries to simplify the complex and basis future predictions on past outcomes. Economics is dismal as a science and there's plenty of empirical evidence to back that up.

Where does my attitude mirror Gove's? you are confusing an argument that things might not be so bad with a dogma, never what I was trying to do. Remove the red mist. I VOTED REMAIN - take that in.

[????]

PS you may know something about modelling, your post suggest you know very little about negotiation, if we are going to patronise....

[jaywalker]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I VOTED REMAIN - take that

> in.

it is simply unclear to me why how you voted is of any relevance to this discussion. Lordship 516 has produced some (very worrying) modelling. There is already evidence of a huge hit to uk company investment decisions. There is already job relocation. Lordship 516 has pointed out the structural asymmetry of our relations with the EU. You simply refrain: 'have faith'. Unfortunately, this just sounds like cognitive dissonance.

[Lordship 516]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Was that the modelling that failed to predict the

> financial crisis in 2008 - whereas as some more

> observational economist called it right? was that

> the Modelling that in the late 80s said the Yen

> was about to become the global currency and Japan

> would overtake the US in the early 90s. Modelling

> is flawed because it tries to rationalise

> irrational behaviour, tries to simplify the

> complex and basis future predictions on past

> outcomes. Economics is dismal as a science and

> there's plenty of empirical evidence to back that

> up.

>

> Where does my attitude mirror Gove's? you are

> confusing an argument that things might not be so

> bad with a dogma, never what I was trying to do.

> Remove the red mist. I VOTED REMAIN - take that

> in.

????

You didn't read my comment with a clear mind. Modelling does fail when you interpret the results as gospel or dogma. Modelling takes place after observation & deduction to test hypotheses and the results of the model have to be tested in order to reduce the risks inherent in the model itself. This is why more than one model has to be used. A madel cannot be tested in real life like you can within engineering or science so you have to run many iterations before you can eventually arrive at a set of options or sometimes reject a set of options. What modelling cannot show or forecast are disruptions in the normal market. What you categorize as irrational behaviour is a subjective view. No one can forecast what another government or central bank might do whether it might be Japan or the US. Any econometrist who uses historical data is going to fail. You have to use the most up to date data that you can get and sometimes have to evaluate missing micro data inputs by using other mathematical tools such as topology which is a uniquely revealing tool when used discretely. There has also been advances in handling Big Data, both structured & unstructured. Modelling has moved a long way since the Yen in the 90s & the melt down of 2008. Both of these crises [crimes] were caused by rogue bankers that thought they could magic money from thin air. Current modelling has these elements factored into them and that is why stress testing is so important for all financial institutions.

I apologise if you felt I was patronising you - I was criticizing you because, like Gove et al, you appear to think we are in a strong position because all the available evidence points to the opposite. We are entering into uncertain territory for an undetermined length of time and have no treaties in place so in the interim we have to trade with the rest of the world on WTO terms - this will hurt companies revenue, unemployment will increase, the pound will further devalue, prices will increase by 7% to 8% [energy by even more], local demand will reduce to the level of necessity. 2 to 3 million unemployed is a bit high but 1.5 million extra unemployed is on the cards by the end of three years.

I called the troubles of the early 80s, the 90s & even called the problems for the mid noughties but couldn't tie it down as to its quantum or year. But my clients used my strategies and avoided greater losses than many others.

On negotiation - this is where I spend most of my time with clients who won't make any decision without weighing up the consequences. It is all about risk reduction & knowing when to say yes & when to say no. I provide options, both positive & negative - others do the deals. I describe it as me [& my colleagues] providing the box - the dealers put the lid on it & the lawyers tie it up nicely with nice ribbons.

UK PLC need to fashion the box, send competent people to fashion the lid and then the lawyers can tie up the ribbons.

[????]

Ok try this

We have no real negotiation strength - we do

The EU can fix individual members problems that occur as a result of Brexit - on what evidence? Greece?

The world can be explained by models.......oh yes

Trade deals can't be put together quickly - they can actually

The EU doesn't want to get to a workable compromise - of course they do

A 'Brexit' type scenario has never happened so how do your models build that in?

I've said we are going to have economic hardship, largely as a result of uncertainty, my point is that if we get on with it, things won't be as bad as your models suggest

[jaywalker]

OK try this

The EU can spot a hegemonic possibility when they see one. If they refuse to negotiate even informally before A50 is invoked we are placed in a hopeless negotiating position.

The EU can fix individual members problems. But we have declared we are no longer a member!

The accuracy of models of system outcomes is actually quite good. See the weather forecast. There is MUCH more data and MUCH more computing power (Moore's law) now: even 'chaotic' systems have long periods of stability. The BofE is polling its informants DAILY to ascertain the 'real' reaction to regrexit.

Trade deals in the EU involve free movement of labour. Unfortunately most regrexiters voted 'leave' on the basis of atavistic notions of nationhood.

The point of a model is that it models the system, not the shock. The shock can be calibrated - for example by the BofE's polling of informants.