[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by ASAP

I am speaking of the entire EU as a whole not just GB... I am not sure how anyone could think that the assimilation of 30 different countries with different languages, banking systems, transportation systems, roads, cultures and economic status would be a good idea? At its core, perhaps an OK idea... in reality, an awful idea that has caused both massive emigration, immigration problems, currency issues, cost of living issues... unequal access to markets and favoritism of the wealthier nations. The moment a country accepts the Euro, everything gets more expensive, earnings for most individuals do not go up... simply because one cannot compare the economic prowess of a nation like Germany to say perhaps Poland that cannot as easily accept all of these demanded / required changes. I think the UK and its people got tired of this...

two words why it was a good idea: free trade.

The only major issue is the lack of control of governmental budgets and debt loads. That was the issue EU never resolved upon forming the union and still obviously have problems with.

All other "issues" you brought up are the effects of the budgetary issues.

[MrRoboto]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

two words why it was a good idea:

free trade.

We know how well that works between USA and Canada

[jtodd_fl]

Oh God... methinks this needs to go over to politics. I only clicked because I thought Brad and Angelina were getting a divorce.

(Wait, I may have already used that one.... dammit.)

[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by MrRoboto

We know how well that works between USA and Canada

pretty well?

There are winners and losers in both countries. What'd you expect, winners all around? Can you please elaborate on why NAFTA hasn't been good?

[MightyMouseTech]

Originally Posted by MrRoboto

We know how well that works between USA and Canada

Canada is an export country, and our main trading partner is the USA. So how does it not help us?

[MrRoboto]

Originally Posted by MightyMouseTech

Canada is an export country, and our main trading partner is the USA. So how does it not help us?

From a consumer point of view we pay quite a bit more for the same products in Canada even on products manufactured in the US.

[MightyMouseTech]

Originally Posted by MrRoboto

From a consumer point of view we pay quite a bit more for the same products in Canada even on products manufactured in the US.

That has nothing to do with NAFTA.

[csu87]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

pretty well?

There are winners and losers in both countries. What'd you expect, winners all around? Can you please elaborate on why NAFTA hasn't been good?

False. America is full of winners, Canada full of losers.

[csu87]

Originally Posted by MrRoboto

From a consumer point of view we pay quite a bit more for the same products in Canada even on products manufactured in the US.

Thats cause your dollar is worth less than ours.

[jtodd_fl]

Originally Posted by csu87

False. America is full of winners, Canada full of losers.

Haha... love that picture... someone needs to give it a white trump wig now. So great.

[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by MrRoboto

From a consumer point of view we pay quite a bit more for the same products in Canada even on products manufactured in the US.

You're going to have to elaborate...are you talking about this on a purchasing power perspective? (as a % of income or standardize against some common in both countries?)
Or straight conversion perspective? (Product A after currency conversion)

Also what consumer perspective are you taking about? I am assuming as a Canadian consumer, you're purchasing Canadian and US goods that you're making this statement? And you're saying what is more expensive? Everything? or just US goods?

What about government taxes? Are you netting taxes or pre-tax? Taxes play a huge part of consumer costs. I am going to have to say mostly likely the effects you're seeing is an aspect of Canadian taxes.

Can you provide one example...b/c your claim is too general to verify.

[wdb]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

Exit camp: A thinly veiled anti-immigration campaign filled with misinformation.

The entire set of misinformation is just ironic:

The regions that voted to leave are going to the be most hurt by an exit, as they are heavy manufacturing and exports focused industries.

They were also the regions that get the most in subsidies from, you guessed it, the EU. They voted to cut off their noses.

I think it is going to be an interesting few weeks for the markets, and a very interesting few months for Britain. It would not surprise me if in the end they never actually leave the EU.

[mPlasticDesign]

My thoughts?

[TheHouseWon]

Don't know long term implications but I will say that UK banks are going to SUFFER. Check out HSBC and Barclays

[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by wdb

They were also the regions that get the most in subsidies from, you guessed it, the EU. They voted to cut off their noses.

I think it is going to be an interesting few weeks for the markets, and a very interesting few months for Britain. It would not surprise me if in the end they never actually leave the EU.

oh yes, I forgot about that. The regions that tended to get EU development money and investments tended to vote exit.

There's a way UK can turn it around....and the EU leaders themselves are divided into two camps too.

Germany wants to give UK ample time to backtrack and for the UK political process to work itself out on what degree of exit, if anything at all, they will partake.

France wants UK to invoke the exit immediately and negotiate terms that disincentives future exits.

[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by TheHouseWon

Don't know long term implications but I will say that UK banks are going to SUFFER. Check out HSBC and Barclays

a direct result of laws that regulate where and how an international can do business in another country. UK banking industry is probably one of the largest service sectors in the economy, and its footprint dominates European banking.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

two words why it was a good idea: free trade.

The only major issue is the lack of control of governmental budgets and debt loads. That was the issue EU never resolved upon forming the union and still obviously have problems with.

All other "issues" you brought up are the effects of the budgetary issues.

This "free trade" that you speak of... please elaborate on how it was not free before the union, and while doing so make sure you mention how it benefited everyone involved... not just the wealthy nations...

and while we r at it... please help explain why the base cost of a car is different in nearly every euro zone country... VAT and local taxes excluded?

[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by ASAP

This "free trade" that you speak of... please elaborate on how it was not free before the union, and while doing so make sure you mention how it benefited everyone involved... not just the wealthy nations...

Who ever said free trade benefitted everyone? When there are barriers to trade such as tariffs, currency rate fluctuations, restrictions of workers' movements, different regulatory and legal regimes, that's NOT free trade.

I don't have any stuff on EU's union, but here are some reading materials how on net NAFTA was better for America and everyone. This is just effects of a similar close economic integration before free trade pacts, and US/Mexico/Canada doesn't have integration of monetary policy and workforce travel. There are benefits of just removed trade tariffs.

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/a...utweigh-costs/
http://www.economist.com/news/leader...-deeper-better

I'm sorry, if your or your family's jobs were effected my it moving to Mexico or Canada, sorry, that's just how free trade works. Perhaps learn to code?

American core competencies isn't making widgets on the cheap. It's providing higher value services

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

who ever said free trade benefitted everyone?

Then we can agree that this does not stand w the basis for creating an economic union... it benefits some and doesnt benefit others... especially when u try to equalize markets that are not remotely close... this is bound to disgruntle some parties... why UK beats me, because I doubt this decision had much to do with economics and more with immigration, but the Union as a whole has massive faults...

[Flying Ace]

Originally Posted by ASAP

Then we can agree that this does not stand w the basis for creating an economic union... it benefits some and doesnt benefit others... especially when u try to equalize markets that are not remotely close... this is bound to disgruntle some parties... why UK beats me, because I doubt this decision had much to do with economics and more with immigration, but the Union as a whole has massive faults...

I disagree...I am saying free trade on net benefits everyone. A integrated economic union only further enhances free trade, with common legal and travel policies, other laws governing business rules and common currency. What doesn't work for the EU is the damn monetary policy and budgets of each country is still uncontrolled by the ECB.

On the jobs losses, people will be left behind, and its up to government policies to retrain and reeducate the displaced workforce.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by Flying Ace

Who ever said free trade benefitted everyone? When there are barriers to trade such as tariffs, currency rate fluctuations, restrictions of workers' movements, different regulatory and legal regimes, that's NOT free trade.

I don't have any stuff on EU's union, but here are some reading materials how on net NAFTA was better for America and everyone. This is just effects of a similar close economic integration before free trade pacts, and US/Mexico/Canada doesn't have integration of monetary policy and workforce travel. There are benefits of just removed trade tariffs.

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/a...utweigh-costs/
http://www.economist.com/news/leader...-deeper-better

I'm sorry, if your or your family's jobs were effected my it moving to Mexico or Canada, sorry, that's just how free trade works. Perhaps learn to code?

American core competencies isn't making widgets on the cheap. It's providing higher value services

I've got so much to say that my keyboard literally doesn't have enough characters...

The part that you fail to understand is that anything and I mean anything can be outsourced, there may be minor legal and medical exceptions but as a whole, nearly everything can be outsourced for pennies on the dollar. You mention coding, which is arguably one of the easiest things to outsource that both China and India will gladly do for you fractions that we will... or perhaps the AI bots that are starting to code for themselves and a prediction for an over abundance of SW engineers will soon hit... or the fact that many corporate / economic leader says that College Education will soon have little value... It is up to the individual nations to incentivize their population to stay, do business with the country, increase their own manufacturing and be as independent as possible... this is what truly allows a nation to grow... the further we go up the former direction, the deeper trouble we get in... a European Union has basically allowed any individual in any member nation to go work in any nation no questions asked.... now what do you suppose this will do the poorer off nations?... sry, it's not an economic union... its an agreement that works to the favor of the wealthy

[TheHouseWon]

JPMorgan Conference Call on ramifications of Brexit: 888-562-5418, Password 95126