Vivian on 20/6/2016 at 15:19
Cool, thanks!
Hang on a minute, Berlusconi?! That's not an objective source!!
faetal on 20/6/2016 at 15:20
There's no hurry.
faetal on 20/6/2016 at 15:21
Is that the right link? Seems to be an interview with Berlusconi. Sort of only works if we assume Berlusconi (previously convicted of fraud) is being honest.
Tony_Tarantula on 20/6/2016 at 15:22
Furthermore he skirts around the biggest issue: the failing EUD and the EUs unsustainable financial condition. His frame only makes sense if you accept that the EU provides economic benefits worth having. If you view it as a sinking ship then his arguments again become irrelevant because why fight to preserve benefits that don't exist?
faetal on 20/6/2016 at 15:25
EUD? What is the current financial status of the EU in your opinion? Again, links.
Tony_Tarantula on 20/6/2016 at 15:41
I'll try to find something open when I get home. What I've seen from the subscription financial data services I have access to it has not been good. Over the last year there have been massive capital outflows from the EU.
Don't take it just from me. Soros was in the news lately for shorting the EUD.
faetal on 20/6/2016 at 15:53
Not sure how much stock (hahahaha geddit!) I place in what investment bankers think of markets given that analysis of individual traders versus financial performance shows an almost complete absence of correlation: (
https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2011/11/28/daniel-kahneman-financial-advisers-arent-immune-from-the-illusion-of-skill/)
Markets do what they do. The only sure fire way to predict markets is to influence them. Part of the reason war is so popular (invest in munitions or aerospace or similar, manufacture war, stock increases in value), ditto business subsidy and creeping privatisation - you can't reliably play the stock market otherwise, it's just a casino. Of course that will never stop those involved with it from having the illusion of skill. Sure they'll be well-trained, knowedgable etc.. but zero ability to reliably predict stock values over time.
I won't "get over" weak sources. Basically, I'm not asking for links as some form of currency to play, I don't care
that you respond with a link, I care whether or not there is good information to back up what you are saying, else I have no clue about the value of what you are saying (unless you get good with providing detailed mechanisms which pan out logically).
But do wait until you get home - I'm in no hurry and mobile phones aren't the best for detailed stuff.
Vivian on 20/6/2016 at 15:54
Hmmm. Interesting but yeah, I think I'd need backup from someone who doesn't call themselves Tyler Durden? I'll have a poke around.
caffeinatedzombeh on 20/6/2016 at 18:12
Quote Posted by Vivian
it sounds like them being 'made to vote again' is a particularly loaded interpretation of what happened
Pretty much, afaik in all of those "made to vote again" situations whilst it's reasonably true that countries that voted against what the EU had decided were persuaded to try again the question being asked wasn't quite the same in the second attempt and some of the reasons people voted no had been dealt with.
The "ignored" against the EU constitution refers to the entire thing being chopped about reordered and worded as amendments to previous treaties then signed as the treaty of Lisbon "to avoid having referendums" in particular the government of the UK at the time said it wasn't going to honor its manifesto pledge to have a referendum on the constitution as the new treaty wasn't the same thing.
