Are the filthy rich for no deal?

Goooner

Distinguished Member
So we get back some of the money we put in, we’re still a net contributor.
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
Yes and you make some great points (I did say there are good arguments of both sides), but I still ask the same question, what is to stop these rights from being eroded?
The electorate. Not even Thatcher could get rid of our NHS.
Can't you see the gradual centralisation of power that is occurring around the world.
The EU?
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
Technically anyone can make money from Brexit (a) if they choose to short Sterling (or place a spread bet on Sterling declining, or buy a put option, or buy assets in dollars, etc.) and (b) as a result of Brexit Sterling falls further.

However, being a short seller (or a spread better) is a risky business. If the market for Sterling moves in the opposite direction then you will lose heavily.

Personally, I have absolutely no problem with people taking short positions on Sterling ahead of Brexit. They are essentially risking their (or their clients money if they are a fund manager or hedge fund) on a guess of a future outcome. Such short sellers could lose money from such a bet. If they do make money then they are making their money from the person who took the opposite bet. A short seller needs someone to buy what they are selling at the price the two parties agree. If everyone feels that Sterling is likely to fall then the short seller will only make money if they find someone to trade with who believes that Sterling will fall less than the short seller does. Short sellers often make a loss.

It is important to remember that if short sellers do make money on Sterling it costs the person they are trading with but not the country as a whole. Some of the press stories about short selling of Sterling seem to imply that if the short sellers make £1 billion profit then somehow it is the Government or the UK as a whole that lose £1 billion. That is simply not the case. Maybe they are linking this situation with Sterling falling out of the ERM. George Soros made a billions by essentially short selling Sterling - which did fall significantly. (He did not do anything wrong - he just guessed correctly and had the funds behind him to make a fortune.) This did cost the UK government billions because they were trying to support Sterling and raise its price by repeatedly buying more and more of it. The Government lost money because they bought Sterling at a high price and later had to sell it at a lower price. The Government did not directly lose money to Soros.
The media (largely owned by rich people), politicians (the rich ones) are all pushing for Brexit. So to mix metaphors, we are now playing with a loaded deck. That was still an interesting read though. Always nice to hear from someone who seems to know what they are talking about. The rest of us are largely guessing ;)
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
The electorate. Not even Thatcher could get rid of our NHS.
Didn't say they would get rid of the NHS. I didn't even suggest it.
 

GadgetObsessed

Well-known Member
Exactly!
The following article is from the Guardian (*not always my favourite source*) but it does link on one of the original articles from the Times (unfortunately behind the paywall) and quotes extensively from Bloomberg. Nigel Farage denies shorting value of sterling on night of Brexit vote
What it essential says is that both the Times and Bloomberg suspect the Farage was "deliberately" playing up the potential win of Remain in order to drive the value of the pound up and that he had knowledge of a final exit poll which predicted that the Leave campaign would likely be the winner.
Interesting - even if he did short sell sterling at the same time as talking up the Remain vote then it doesn't appear that he has broken any law. If it is true then Farage executed an excellent trading strategy.
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
So we get back some of the money we put in, we’re still a net contributor.
Quoting from the article in UK's EU rebate - explained
In perspective
Other member states must pay more to the budget to make up for the UK’s rebate, with France and Italy facing the highest burden. According to the OBR, between 2009 and 2015 the UK’s average saving due to the rebate was £3.9 billion each year resulting in an average net annual contribution of £8.5 billion.

At the moment, the UK is the third largest net contributor, after Germany and France, to the EU budget. But in per-capita terms the UK is only the eighth biggest contributor.
------

Think about it! While Britain is getting a rebate, the French are suffering. So when we leave, we will be relieving the French of their burden. :) <---

...and you call yourself British..---> :) <---
 
Last edited:

Coulson

Well-known Member
Interesting - even if he did short sell sterling at the same time as talking up the Remain vote then it doesn't appear that he has broken any law. If it is true then Farage executed an excellent trading strategy.
Agreed. But only because he is a position of influence and as such this is a clear conflict of interest.
 
Last edited:

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
Didn't say they would get rid of the NHS. I didn't even suggest it.
Same with everything else. We got more in the the UK than the EU allows and before the EU came along. We got that as the various parties promise these things to get elected. How did we get more before without being in the EU but it will change once we are out? If it's such a big worry and really was linked, which it isn't, what stops us rejoining anyway?
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
Agreed. But only because he is a position of influence and as such this is a clear conflict on interest.
Farage and everyone else didn't expect the vote to leave. If it comes to it, I made some money. I bet we'd leave. I didn't know we would as it's a secret ballot.
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
If it's such a big worry and really was linked, which it isn't, what stops us rejoining anyway?
The amount of work it would take to rejoin something we are already a member of. There is no fast track. It will take years. Plus we loose the rebate so we end up paying more.
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
Farage and everyone else didn't expect the vote to leave. If it comes to it, I made some money. I bet we'd leave. I didn't know we would as it's a secret ballot.
Read the article, or my summarised conclusions. He didn't know.....initially! But it looks like he had insider information before the closing of the polls. Yes it was still a gamble, but with a higher probability of success.
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
The media (largely owned by rich people), politicians (the rich ones) are all pushing for Brexit.
Say what? Blair, Soros, bankers, Kinnocks, Branson, Heseltine, Lord Sainsbury and most of the rich people are for Remain.

 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
Plus we loose the rebate so we end up paying more.
No guarantee we'd keep it. Blair gave away some of it as he hoped to be EU president.

Why shouldn't it be quick? Presumably we are already "aligned."
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
Say what? Blair, Soros, bankers, Kinnocks, Branson, Heseltine, Lord Sainsbury and most of the rich people are for Remain.

So what you are saying is mine is bigger (or in this case richer) than yours :D

The difference is people like Aaron Banks and with Boris and his no.1 henchman in Downing St they now have an even more direct line. The other major difference is the media. Even the BBC has changed since the government stuffed it with suits. They used to be right of centre, then they veered left of centre, now they seem to have just done a full right turn.
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
No guarantee we'd keep it. Blair gave away some of it as he hoped to be EU president.

Why shouldn't it be quick? Presumably we are already "aligned."
Nope. No shortcuts. That's not the way the EU works in these kind of things. Just ask Scotland.
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
Read my full (edited) post. I don't believe in Project Fear because I know that it's just another slogan (just like 350 million for the NHS).
Which we won't get until we stop funding the EU and leave.

As for your question? Simples. The regions that mostly voted for Brexit are the same regions that mostly benefited from EU subsidies. How is that a vote winner?
Outside London it was practically all of England and Wales.

Again how come we got more outside the EU than in it?

I can see the problems with the EU, we all can, but I'm just not sure this is the answer.
Perhaps you should have voted for Remain then?
 

raduv1

Distinguished Member
Strange one this when it comes to peeps making money and being morally bankrupt it is Deutsche Bank at the very heart n soul of the EU that sores above all . Also seems that one has to be outside the EU to fine these cockroaches , why is that ?
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
So what you are saying is mine is bigger (or in this case richer) than yours :D
Aah so rich people who want to Remain, even though there's more of them don't count, because, whatever. :D

The difference is people like Aaron Banks and with Boris and his no.1 henchman in Downing St they now have an even more direct line.
Nice conspiracy theory.
The other major difference is the media. Even the BBC has changed since the government stuffed it with suits. They used to be right of centre, then they veered left of centre, now they seem to have just done a full right turn.
Most proRemain organisation going. Question Time has never had more leavers than Remainers on the panel. It almost always has Remainers.
 

SteakAndCake

Suspended
I saw this doc where a big time money man was backing no deal?
Does this imply the rich will benefit at the expense of the average?
Or will everyone benefit?
At a certain wealth level, everything is opportunity and it becomes impossible to lose. Brexit is another of those things. Just another opportunity to make a few people very very rich and many people much poorer.

Despite the conspiracy theories, I don't believe Brexit was contrived for this purpose but there are now plenty of people who will profit from it.
 

Sonic67

Distinguished Member
What it essential says is that both the Times and Bloomberg suspect the Farage was "deliberately" playing up the potential win of Remain in order to drive the value of the pound up and that he had knowledge of a final exit poll which predicted that the Leave campaign would likely be the winner.
A poll is a poll. They are still guesswork and constantly flawed.
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
Aah so rich people who want to Remain, even though there's more of them don't count, because, whatever. :D
That's a guess on your part mate :)
Nice conspiracy theory.
How does a fact turn into a conspiracy theory?
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
A poll is a poll. They are still guesswork and constantly flawed.
As I said, still a gamble, but a damn good one, and a clear conflict of interest.
 

GadgetObsessed

Well-known Member
Read the article, or my summarised conclusions. He didn't know.....initially! But it looks like he had insider information before the closing of the polls. Yes it was still a gamble, but with a higher probability of success.
If he had access to a private poll then he had access to information others did not have but legally speaking that is not insider trading. He was not an "insider" as in this case there was no company to be inside of. Technically anyone could have got hold of the same information by paying for their own poll.
 

Squiffy

Distinguished Member
Think about it! While Britain is getting a rebate, the French are suffering. So when we leave, we will be relieving the French of their burden.
This is economically incoherent.

We are a net contributor, despite the rebate. When we leave, France and the other net contributors will have to pay more, or the net recipients receive less.

Us leaving doesn't save France anything.
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
If he had access to a private poll then he had access to information others did not have but legally speaking that is not insider trading. He was not an "insider" as in this case there was no company to be inside of. Technically anyone could have got hold of the same information by paying for their own poll.
From the same article:
The Bloomberg report has raised difficult questions for the polling industry, which has been depicted as benefiting extensively from the sale of private polling data to hedge funds seeking to profit from insights into how markets might move.

Sources told Bloomberg that they believed Brexit to have generated “one of the most profitable single days in the history of their industry.” Odey Asset Management, run by the Conservative party donor and leave supporter Crispin Odey, is reported to have made $300m from Brexit.

It is illegal under British electoral law to “publish” exit polls before 10pm on the day of an election or referendum.
Hedge funds and pollsters appear to have interpreted the law so as to permit the private provision of exit poll data to select individuals. A prominent barrister told Bloomberg that the legal definition of “publish” had never been tested.
-----
...and why would you test it if you know that you are benefiting or could potentially benefit from the same loophole in the future.
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
This is economically incoherent.

We are a net contributor, despite the rebate. When we leave, France and the other net contributors will have to pay more, or the net recipients receive less.

Us leaving doesn't save France anything.
If don't have to pay extra to make up for the UK's rebate then it does. You could argue it either way but anyway, it was a joke. Hence the punchline.
 

Stuey1

Well-known Member
Quoting from the article in UK's EU rebate - explained
In perspective
Other member states must pay more to the budget to make up for the UK’s rebate, with France and Italy facing the highest burden. According to the OBR, between 2009 and 2015 the UK’s average saving due to the rebate was £3.9 billion each year resulting in an average net annual contribution of £8.5 billion.

At the moment, the UK is the third largest net contributor, after Germany and France, to the EU budget. But in per-capita terms the UK is only the eighth biggest contributor.
------

Think about it! While Britain is getting a rebate, the French are suffering. So when we leave, we will be relieving the French of their burden.

...and you call yourself British..
Which countries farms do best out of the CAP policy? (suffering :rotfl:)
 

GadgetObsessed

Well-known Member
As I said, still a gamble, but a damn good one, and a clear conflict of interest.
To have a conflict of interest you must have some force competing interests where one of those interests is for others and one is for yourself. For example if you are a Government minister and you are choosing between suppliers one of whom is a family member. In this case Farage possibly had his own financial interest but he was not operating on behalf of anyone else so had no conflict of interests.
 

Coulson

Well-known Member
To have a conflict of interest you must have some force competing interests where one of those interests is for others and one is for yourself. For example if you are a Government minister and you are choosing between suppliers one of whom is a family member. In this case Farage possibly had his own financial interest but he was not operating on behalf of anyone else so had no conflict of interests.
Then I used the wrong legal term. But it does look like his cohorts benefited from this. If true then it's pretty obvious that he would be "thanked" for his help.

Wow my original edit of this was weird. I love auto spell check.
 
Last edited:

Coulson

Well-known Member

Similar threads

Trending threads

Latest news

Netflix reveals how viewing metrics determines a show's success
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Discovery launches dplay AVOD service in UK and Ireland
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Cyrus announces ONE Cast Smart Audio System
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Chord Electronics debuts ULTIMA 3 power amp at UK Hi-Fi Show Live
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Virgin Media unleashes Gig1 home broadband in Manchester
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom