Earlier quoted context omitted.
the boomer can always refinance to the 3% - not sure what you are getting at here.
The OP is being sarcastic.
Yes I am parodying the old avocado toast argument.
When George Soros Broke the British Pound (2014)
171–180 of 277 posts
Re: When George Soros Broke the British Pound (2014)
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not true at all. I am from Czech republic and we benefited massively from these contributions. If I compare for example general state of infrastructure it is much better than in UK where I currently reside. All the train stations were rebuilt using EU funds. Also not sure what you are talking about "This halfway step only serves the wealthy.", not not really. Look at quality of life and GDP rise in post soviet EU cou…
The Czech Republic isn't in the Eurozone and doesn't face the structural disadvantages that Greece or Portugal do.
Well you are talking about EU budget. If you look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_the_European_Union#E... its clear that both Greece and Portugal receive higher contributions then Czech republic. Also I am not sure what structural disadvantages you are looking at. Look at Slovakia that is in Eurozone and benefited massively.
Re: When George Soros Broke the British Pound (2014)
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why no one ? You don't believe, out of all human in the world, that there is someone that gain satisfaction out of destroying healthy financial entities ?
If one person could destroy it, it wouldn't be healthy would it?
Healthy doesn't mean could not be destroyed.
Re: When George Soros Broke the British Pound (2014)
#174Forgetting the politics of George Soros (which isn't suitable for HN anyway), I don't believe he is to blame for the UK government's questionable choices. To put the estimated £3.3 billion loss into perspective: * The failed NHS software update/upgrade project cost >£12 billion [0]. * The UK spends ~£9 billion a year (after calculating rebates) to be a minority voting block in the EU [1]. It's currently costing ~£0.7…
UK should be now getting 350 million GBP per week for NHS.
> UK should be now getting 350 million GBP per week for NHS.
It hasn't left yet and the reality is that it'll take years to leave (if it does).
You could maybe justify £350 million a week over the course of a year based on a hard Brexit, where the UK doesn't pay the £30-£40 billion divorce settlement.
It's unclear how much will be spent in replacing EU infrastructure, but it should be overall beneficial to the UK once trade agreements are in place after a number of years.
Re: When George Soros Broke the British Pound (2014)
#175Forgetting the politics of George Soros (which isn't suitable for HN anyway), I don't believe he is to blame for the UK government's questionable choices. To put the estimated £3.3 billion loss into perspective: * The failed NHS software update/upgrade project cost >£12 billion [0]. * The UK spends ~£9 billion a year (after calculating rebates) to be a minority voting block in the EU [1]. It's currently costing ~£0.7…
The politics of Brexit are also not very suitable for a HN on shorting the pound. By mentioning only the costs of remaining in the EU, not the ongoing benefits, you're being pretty disingenuous
Re: When George Soros Broke the British Pound (2014)
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
UK should be now getting 350 million GBP per week for NHS.
> UK should be now getting 350 million GBP per week for NHS. It hasn't left yet and the reality is that it'll take years to leave (if it does). You could maybe justify £350 million a week over the course of a year based on a hard Brexit, where the UK doesn't pay the £30-£40 billion divorce settlement. It's unclear how much will be spent in replacing EU infrastructure, but it should be overall beneficial to the UK onc…
> it should be overall beneficial to the UK once trade agreements are in place after a number of years
It probably won't. I don't know why leavers think the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than a bloc of 27 countries.
Re: When George Soros Broke the British Pound (2014)
#177Soros didn't "break" the pound. The systematically important financial and political players he fronts for "broke" the pound. You can't "break" a systematically important currency like the pound, swiss franc, dollar, yen, etc without significant banking and political support behind the scenes. The pound was "broken" in order to pay off the myriad soviet leaders who agreed to dissolve warsaw pact and then the soviet union.
Re: When George Soros Broke the British Pound (2014)
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
> UK should be now getting 350 million GBP per week for NHS. It hasn't left yet and the reality is that it'll take years to leave (if it does). You could maybe justify £350 million a week over the course of a year based on a hard Brexit, where the UK doesn't pay the £30-£40 billion divorce settlement. It's unclear how much will be spent in replacing EU infrastructure, but it should be overall beneficial to the UK onc…
> it should be overall beneficial to the UK once trade agreements are in place after a number of years It probably won't. I don't know why leavers think the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than a bloc of 27 countries.
I'm no expert, but perhaps not having to comprise with 27 other nations will allow the UK to negotiate the trade deals that benefit them the most, rather than deals that are agreed upon by a majority of countries in the EU.
Re: When George Soros Broke the British Pound (2014)
#179There seems to be an abundance of posts about Soros himself getting flagged killed in this thread. Why is that? Are his character and his political ambitions not relevant to a discussion about his demonstrated ability and intent to cause massive financial disturbance in the global economy?
Because Soros is a very important frontman for the real power players and he spends a lot of money in media and the internet to ban content. People think that alex jones got deplatformed because of sandy hook. He wasn't. He got deplatformed because of his neverending attacks on Soros.
"News" organization who relentlessly attack white male privilege defended Soros ( a privileged white male ) and attacked a female jewish feminist hero ( of "Lean In" and Facebook fame ) Sheryl Sandberg.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/annehelenpetersen/shery...
https://www.vox.com/2018/11/16/18098728/facebook-anti-semiti...
Can you imagine vox and buzzfeed attacking a female jewish feminist in favor of a white male hedge fund manager?
Financial Times named Soros their "Person of the Year" in 2018.
WashingtonPost is like Soros' personal PR firm. If you want a good laugh, try searching for "Soros" and WashingtonPost. It's strange how a "newspaper" that exist to hold "power to account" surely goes insane defending Soros.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/01/26...
And of course there is the NYTimes PR garbage.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/25/business/dealbook/george-...
The "news" says that people who think Soros is a major globalist puppeteer are conspiracy theoriest. And yet the "news" rallies around Soros as if he is some kind of globalist messiah. They report on what Soros says about every major topic and yet claim he isn't that important.
If "news" was really about "holding power to account", we would be getting a lot more hit pieces on Soros, Kissinger, Albright and the people they answer to. But all the "news" does is push PR for these people.
Re: When George Soros Broke the British Pound (2014)
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
> UK should be now getting 350 million GBP per week for NHS. It hasn't left yet and the reality is that it'll take years to leave (if it does). You could maybe justify £350 million a week over the course of a year based on a hard Brexit, where the UK doesn't pay the £30-£40 billion divorce settlement. It's unclear how much will be spent in replacing EU infrastructure, but it should be overall beneficial to the UK onc…
> it should be overall beneficial to the UK once trade agreements are in place after a number of years It probably won't. I don't know why leavers think the UK will be able to negotiate better trade deals than a bloc of 27 countries.
This is going largely off topic, but I'll indulge.
> I don't know why leavers think the UK will be able to
> negotiate better trade deals than a bloc of 27 countries.
Other than shear volume, what does the EU offer that the UK is not capable of? And is what the EU offers worth ~£9 billion a year?
The UK doesn't have to make better trade deals, they can even afford to be slightly worse and still be of a net benefit. The trade deals would have to be ~£9 billion worse in order for them not to be beneficial.
Playing 4D chess: I highly suspect that the UK will receive very good trade deals in a medium/long-term gamble by other super powers to destabilize the EU.