Brexit: In or Out

Yes, I can see that now.

Care to provide any source for that?

I think you might need to re-read it. For a start, it's not talking about creating/destroying "wealth", but "social value" (which it also refers to as "benefit to society"), compared to "value" - not that it actually bothers to define what "social value" is or how it's been calculated. At least, not in that precis, and I CBA to go through the 44page PDF. A quick scan through that shows basically a lot of waffle and a handful of numbers, but nothing terribly concrete.

I've posted this on a thread on th AC board, but its equally applicable here:

I think we need to be very careful to separate out the pre-referendum "project fear" statements made both by politicians and businesses from post referendum fact. I've seen a variety of media reports this morning on a number of issues that are simply rehashes of "project fear" and have minimal relation to reality.

Morgan Stanley have specifically briefed that the story of them moving staff to Dublin and Frankfurt is not true:

www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/morgan-stanley-denies-it-is-moving-2000-jobs-from-london-to-dublin-after-brexit-vote-a3280436.html

www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/morgan-stanley-brexit-eu-referendum-jobs-dublin-frankfurt-a7100911.html

twitter.com/search?q=morgan+stanley+denies&ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^search

I've also just watched a ridiculous BBC report (live not recorded) on the financial markets, that failed to mention that most of the losses on FTSE-100 have been recovered and the losses actually incurred today are not that extraordinary, and indeed the FTSE has closed HIGHER than at the start of the week. (Admittedly the FTSE-250 has not recovered as strongly today)

That is an old petition that sets hurdles for 75% turnout and 60% majority that are not likely to be met. In effect it was seeking to rig the vote so that it was only possible to have a remain result.

For context, that seeks a 75% turnout and the actual turnout in the vote was 72.2%. That is higher than the turnout than in the last five UK elections, going back to 1992 before it was beaten at 77.7%.

"(ShareCast News) - The FTSE 100 was down 3.5% to 6,114.73 in afternoon trading, still firmly in the red but well off its earlier lows and outperforming European peers, as investors reacted to news that Britain has opted to leave the European Union.

Unsurprisingly, housebuilders took the brunt of the selling as investors in the UK tried to gauge the impact of Brexit on the wider economy. Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey, Barratt Developments and Berkeley Group all tumbled.

Banks were also under the cosh, with Lloyds and Barclays both over 20% weaker.

Shore Capital said: "Although banks are much better capitalised and funded than they were prior to the credit crisis to withstand such stress scenarios, they remain highly levered equity investments, which makes accurately calling valuations very difficult even at the best of times.

"Domestic bank and lending names will undoubtedly be hit hardest on fears of higher bad debt and lower revenue, but this will likely take time to emerge."

Although it certainly felt like it, it wasn't all doom and gloom in equity markets.

Randgold Resources and Fresnillo shone as gold and silver prices advanced.

Meanwhile, sin stocks British American Tobacco and Imperial Brands also racked up healthy gains, while aerospace and defence firm Rolls-Royce rallied. RR was quick to point out on Friday that two third of its revenue and three quarters of its order book are generated outside the EU, so there will be no immediate impact on the day-to-day business."

(1) The turnout required here is (AFAIR) far higher even than the government was proposing for strike ballots. I wonder if the originator of the petition thought about this?

(2) Having been a member of a couple of (Baptist) churches that require a greater than 50% majority in certain cases, I find such rules totally frustrating. Effectively they leave the organisation in a situation that nobody wanted.