Johnny Bognor

Most businesses do not export. In fact, 89% of businesses do not export at all but are subject to all EU regulation and red tape. Leaving the EU would mean that 89% of businesses could have reduced red tape. Don't you agree that this offsets some of the additional red tape incurred by those exporting to the EU???

In my sector, the European Data Protection Regulation came to pass. The UK, which has a bigger reliance on online / e-commerce lobbied quite hard for softer regulations. They were watered down in part from the proposed draconian legislation, but the regulation is still anti-business. So we don't really have that much of a say in things and our influence is limited. So all in all, there is/was risk to both remain and leave. I just wanted it down for the record, that remaining is not risk free and not necessarly playing it safe. The scare mongering from the remainers, in part, influenced me to vote out. If they couldn't put a coherent positive argument for remaining, instead of desperate scare tactics, it made me question their motives. ... and that is still the crux of the matter. If the status quo means being subject to regulations that will be forced on member countries (who have little say and influence) which may be to their detriment, then it is not risk free. There is no "playing it safe" in remaining, as there is no "playing it safe" in leaving. One of the points made on here about exiting the single market relates to the extra paperwork and regulation involved in trading with the EU. This is true, but only for the companies that will export to the EU. Under the current "status quo", all regulations relate to all businesses. So whilst some businesses may have extra paperwork if we exit, most businesses could have less paperwork. The changes in regulations will never stand still. This presents a risk at the end of the day as we don't know where it will end up

Nail. Hit. Head. There is and was no status quo and remaining is not risk free, although a lot of remainers voted that way. When the campaign started, that was pretty much my line of thought. However, when realising that the status quo didnt exist, I started to question it and changed my mind.

**** that, I'm not coming round yours for a breakkie

Not really. Remainers have different reasons, as do the leavers. Some lefties wanted to remain because they saw the EU as being able to keep tabs on the tories, in the absence of a labour government. Some wanted unrestricted travel as they were too young to remember unrestricted travel prior to maastrict Some believe in the single market (which I do sympathise with) There is a whole array of reasons for leaving as there is for staying (some good and some ridiculous).

So what single reason did remainers vote to remain??? Just asking...

Ah but what does breakfast mean? Are we looking at continental with croissants and orange juice or are we looking at a full on fry up?? Sometimes people elect to have breakfast but don't quite know what they want until they see the menu Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

It wouldn't be a bad thing if the EU raised them first.... Unless you want to bend over and take it up the proverbial. If they raise them, we raise them. As you said, raising them is bad for business. Therefore if the EU raise them, then it's clearly out of spite and they couldn't expect us not to raise them in return. As it happens, the current devaluation of the pound more than offsets any WTO tarrifs... our goods would still be cheaper than they were pre referendum. Meanwhile, with the devaluation which makes their goods 10% more expensive before the tarrifs are applied, means that it would hurt them more. Assuming 10% tarrifs both ways, our goods more or less cost the same as 2 months ago (with the devaluation), whilst theirs would be 20% more expensive. It is really not in their interests... Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Whilst they have 27 members who all need to agree. It's no surprise that the EU can't efficiently and effectively negotiate trade deals with any of the world's top 10 economies. That is in fact the biggest worry with Brexit. Not our negotiating skills (which are limited and what remainers bang on about) but the complete uselessness and ineffectiveness of the EU to negotiate anything with anyone and then getting all 27 to agree.

US-EU trade deal http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/ttip-trade-deal-agreement-failed-brexit-latest-news-eu-us-germany-vice-chancellor-a7213876.html So with this deal now dead and buried, does this mean that the queue with the US has now got considerably shorter?

The basic fundamentals of a saints chant are missing... No No "we hate pompey" Have we really changed that much as a club?

Our cash flows on fire, your accountant's terrified!!

LOL https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/20/brexit-eu-referendum-economy-project-fear ..But it is obvious that the sky has not fallen in as a result of the referendum, and those who said it would look a bit silly

So with the benefit of experience, explain how everything went to rat sh it the last time there was a significant devaluation after exiting the ERM... Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

There are loads of examples... Take call centres or software development jobs which are often outsourced offshore. They are now 15% more expensive. The argument to onshore becomes stronger. There are pluses and minuses and as we have a balance of trade deficit, overall we could be worse off. However a significant part of this will be offset by stronger exports and buying British. People won't be necessarily making a "buy british" decision. Many consumers buy on price. British products will be more price competitive and people who buy on price will be more likely to buy British by default Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

When the economy last went through steady economic growth (not including the labour credit fueled boom) was after the £ plummeted on leaving the ERM. Devaluation is not all bad news.. Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

People could choose to holiday here .. People could buy home grown food which will be more competitive now.. English cheddar over French or Italian cheese... There are plenty of british things that can be bought... I just can't be arsed to list them Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Indeed. Regarding inflation, people won't continue to spend as they did in the past. So more would/should buy British. This will partly offset inflationary pressures. The assumption that everyone will have the same spending patterns and take the price rises on the chin is naive Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Yes a majority can be wrong. Just look at the french after they rejected what became the lisbon treaty. The EU changed the words so it no longer required a referendum and it got pushed through because the French people were wrong and the EU knows best... Then look at the Irish who rejected it. They were clearly wrong too. So with a few word changes and millions spent on persuading the clearly wrong irish people, the Lisbon treaty was born. So yes, I agree. The majority of people who vote against the EU are wrong. So they will do everything in their power to go against the will of the people and even 'punish' them. Just look at the arrogance of the EU leaders stating that the UK should be punished, just because the majority of people in the UK had a view that was at odds with theirs. Punished??? Punished?? That alone is reason enough to want to leave.

LOL

The £30 cap for away tickets is welcome by all fans, but Virgin Media are going to subsidise away ticket prices at St Mary's, so that away fans will pay £20 per ticket. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3731191/Southampton-cap-St-Mary-s-ticket-prices-away-fans-20.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490 I personally welcome the £30 cap and think it is good for the Prem, but would rather Virgin Media subsidise home fans...

Wait, you're not supposed to talk about the FTSE 100 since the referendum. You're only supposed to talk about the FTSE 250, despite no one ever talking about it before. And guess what... wait a minute... that's up too.. Hold on... Whiteread is down since the referendum. Maybe that's a sign...Maybe it suggests remainers are crying into their beer, rather than drinking it Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

LOL I did notice that but kept quiet. It will teach me for reading zero hedge. But the bank is still in a mess... Multi billion losses, multiple fines for rigging markets, suicides of executives, complete collapse of share price.. this comes after two attempts at recapitalisation. Ultimately it won't be allowed to fail, despite the EU's rules on bailing out banks. You see they make rules, then don't stick to them when it suits... it's the EU way.... Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

FTSE 250 now trading above pre-referendum level, me old pedigree chump... looking forward to the BBC headlines....

But they are nearly 50% down on what they were in 2003 when there were 1,074 murders. The large increase in 2015 was partly put down to increased gangland activity. The police-recorded crime figures include a 9% rise in knife crime and a 4% rise in gun crime, which are thought to reflect a rise in gang violence largely in London and Manchester. The rise in gun crime is the first recorded for eight years and includes a 10% rise in London. So gang related crime is definitely a problem that needs to be tackled. But if a gang member kills another gang member, it seems less of a problem than a child being mown down by an HGV, where the motive is to kill indiscriminately. It would be interesting to see the number of murders broken down by motive, as this gives a real insight into the numbers. The problem with the recent incidents in Europe, are that they are indiscriminate.. I suspect that most murders in the UK do not have the same motive... crimes of passion, jealousy, mental illness, financial, gang related etc After a bit of digging... The most at risk age group for homicides are children under a year of age Above 16 years, the most at risk age ranges are 16 to 20, and 21 to 29. Two thirds of homicide victims are male The most common method used for homicide is a knife or sharp instrument (approx 40% of homicides) for both men and women. The second most common method for males victims was punching or kicking, for female victims it was strangulation. Gun and firearm murders represented 6% of victims Female victims were most likely to be killed by someone they knew (approx 78%), with around 47% of female victims being killed by a partner or ex-partner, male victims knew their assailant around 57% of the time, being killed by a partner or ex-partner 5% of the time. Victims under 16 were likely to know their assailant (around 70%), when the assailant was known this was regularly the parent of the victim (50%).