International News Events: Asked and Answered...

[archaeo42]

Any thoughts on the most recent happenings around Brexit?

I found this WaPo article interesting: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/scottish-court-rules-johnsons-suspension-of-britains-parliament-was-illegal/2019/09/11/84265a36-d40a-11e9-8924-1db7dac797fb_story.html?wpisrc=al_world__alert-world&wpmk=1

[backatit]

I'm still on Brexit strike because it's too insane. I will read the news occasionally and we talk to people in my partner's office and our colleagues in Germany and Ireland, but it's just too much to even contemplate. There is too much unknown - if there is a vote on something we will be there, but other than that...

[mamselle]

I was coming over to post the Scots decision as well as to reference the Boyle merry-go-round here.

"May you live in interesting times" seems to be the active imprication of the moment...

M.

[spork]

Any thoughts on the most recent happenings around Brexit?

[. . .]

My thought is . . . the Brits are fucked. Thank you, David Cameron.

[mamselle]

Friends of mine sort-of knew him, apparently, socially, and were both elated when he entered office...and when he left it.

She was very discouraged, in particular, they'd seen him as such a refreshing change from John Major.

M.

[Scotia]

Any thoughts on the most recent happenings around Brexit?

I found this WaPo article interesting: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/scottish-court-rules-johnsons-suspension-of-britains-parliament-was-illegal/2019/09/11/84265a36-d40a-11e9-8924-1db7dac797fb_story.html?wpisrc=al_world__alert-world&wpmk=1

Any thoughts on the most recent happenings around Brexit?

I found this WaPo article interesting: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/scottish-court-rules-johnsons-suspension-of-britains-parliament-was-illegal/2019/09/11/84265a36-d40a-11e9-8924-1db7dac797fb_story.html?wpisrc=al_world__alert-world&wpmk=1

"Sources in Number 10" now seem to be suggesting that Scottish judges are politically biased. This is not going down well, including with several Conservatives, and particularly not with Scots (the Scottish legal system is independent of the system in England and Wales). More and more people I know are eyeing up Scotland becoming independent as an attractive option when they look at the willingness, and likely attempts, of Johnson and his coterie to break the law in order to force through Brexit on their terms. Those people are include two acquaintances who have until now been staunchly unionist Conservative voters.

Meanwhile, people who funded Johnson's leadership campaign are reportedly making a lot of money on the currency markets.

[mamselle]

Meanwhile, people who funded Johnson's leadership campaign are reportedly making a lot of money on the currency markets.

How does that work? I'm muddled.

They've bet on his departure, or...?

M.

[quasihumanist]

Meanwhile, people who funded Johnson's leadership campaign are reportedly making a lot of money on the currency markets.

How does that work? I'm muddled.

They've bet on his departure, or...?

M.

If Brexit happens (and particularly if hard Brexit happens), then there will be fewer people buying UK goods, because UK goods will be subject to a tariff.  In order to buy UK goods, one has to buy pounds.  Hence, if Brexit happens, there will be less demand for pounds, so the pound will be worth less.

People who buy and sell currency for a living obviously don't want to wait for Brexit to actually happen to actually sell their pounds - because then they would suddenly lose a lot of money all at one shot.  Therefore, the pound is already worth quite a bit less than it was a few months ago.

A few months ago, the people who funded Johnson's campaign borrowed a lot of pounds, sold them for dollars or Euro or yen, and bought US/Euro/Japanese bonds with the money.  These people have made a lot of pounds, because the 10 million Euro they bought for 8.7 mil pounds 3 months ago is now worth 8.9 mil pounds.  Note that, if you want to borrow 8.7 mil pounds to sell for 10 million Euro, you only need to put up about 450,000 pounds of your own money - the bank will lend you the rest (using the Euro you buy as collateral).

If you live in the UK, and hence your wealth is effectively measured in pounds (because that's what you'll be spending to buy your next yacht), you could've added about 44% to your wealth (for every 450,000 pounds you have, you made 200,000 more) in a mere 3 months - certainly you can afford to give a few pounds to Johnson's campaign to help make that happen.

It's thought that, if hard Brexit actually happens, the 10 million Euro might end up being worth as much as 10 million pounds.

Of course, this analysis completely ignores the fact that some of the people who were funding the campaigns of rivals to Johnson were making the opposite bet - borrowing Euro to buy pounds in the hopes that Brexit would become less likely and the pound would become more valuable.  So far they have lost.  If they had won, we might be hearing about that instead.

[mamselle]

Thanks to the above explanation I actually understood an article on this when it turned up on my newsfeed this AM.

So, beside the ongoing drama in the UK, I'm becoming seriously upset about China's increasing military presence in, at, and near Hong Kong.

The menacing stance worries me, and if Tienamen Square repeats itself because, once again, a high-ranking politico has commercial interests in China, I fear we will have lost any shreds of international credibility/integrity we have left.

M.

[quasihumanist]

The following is my opinion only.  My kindergarten level Cantonese does not make me any better informed on the subject than anyone else.  Neither does having spent part of my childhood (from when I was 4 until I was 8 - this was before handover to China was seriously on the horizon) in Hong Kong.  The closest family connection I have there is some in-laws of some cousins.

The Chinese government sees democracy in Hong Kong as an existential threat.  They can and will 'reeducate' every one of the 7 million people in Hong Kong before they allow it.  If some other country intervenes, they are willing to start nuclear war.  (Frankly, if they couldn't reeducate all of Hong Kong, they'd be willing to nuke it.  All those folks in surrounding areas of Guangdong who would also die are the descendants of anti-revolutionary Nationalists anyways.  (Guangdong was the last part of China to be taken over in the Chinese Civil War.))

Of course they want to economic benefits that Hong Kong brings (not just to itself but to all of China), and they are perfectly willing to tolerate a good deal of day-to-day freedom and self-governance for Hong Kong as long as they remain clearly in control.  (Also, at some point, they were hoping that being a friendly government for Hong Kong would help in convincing Taiwan to accept similar arrangements, but that hope is now gone for a generation at least.)

Maybe the UK could've negotiated a better deal for Hong Kong in the 90s, but that ship has long sailed.

There is a reason that every rich person in Hong Kong basically bought and still maintains at some cost residency in one of UK/Australia/Canada/US.  I don't know how you could get this data, but I think you could get a better handle on the seriousness of the situation by seeing how many of the rarely occupied (i.e. owned by someone who usually lives there a couple weeks a year) condos in Vancouver or Perth are actually now occupied than by just about any other measure.

[mamselle]

And the very worst, it would seem to me, is that China would kill the goose that laid the golden egg just to own the nest the goose sits on, thinking that's what produces the eggs....

M.

[quasihumanist]

I'm not sure if you misunderstood.

I don't think the Chinese government has any special desire to control Hong Kong.  Rather, they fear that democracy is contagious, and that completely free elections in Hong Kong would lead to greater demands for the same in the rest of China.

I think they would be happy for Hong Kong to be independent if it were a place like Singapore, where most of the citizens are genuinely happy with one-party rule and implicit limits to political freedoms, but the recent history of Hong Kong suggests that a majority of its citizens would not be happy with mostly-free elections.

[mamselle]

Well, no, I do understand, but I'm thinking that as politically "pure" (by its terms) as the Chinese may want to be, it's always a toss-up in my mind whether that's the real issue, or just a convenient cladding for an excuse to seek economic leverage.

Or maybe both.

But, you could well be right.

Ideology and economy are both powerful forces, whether for greater ease in governing ones populace or on their own terms. Maybe I'm just being to cynical....

That's helpful input, indeed.

Thanks.

[mamselle]

Double a few days later...

A. There will always be an England...

                                                                            Hong Kong

                                                                                                             Kurdish (Peace Alley) nation

                                                                                                                                                                 Taiwan....

What's next?

B. Maybe the "lighthouse beam" from the center of the galaxy has curved around in time to meet us now and THAT'S why we have such benighted leaders at present.

Going around and playing "You'n'me Against Them" with the smaller EU nations is not going to sit well with Macron and Merkle--Booris seems a bit like he's trying to tear the thing apart for his own means...not smart, wise, or kind....

M.



               

[mamselle]

Fourteen days and counting.

Or not.

M.