[–] The_Only_Other ago
I spoke to a contact at a ratings agency yesterday (Saturday). The outlook is not good, and they certainly don't intend to wait for two years while new deals are negotiated.
You're full of shit, you haven't spoken to a contact in the ratings agency, and obviously don't understand how credit ratings agencies operate. The don't make knee-jerk reactions to market fluctuations, and will not downgrade one of the world's largest economies until they have very good reason to do so. Their future rating will remain exactly the same until trade deals are negotiated (and it is very unlikely they will take 2 years, that's just how long the UK has until it's current trade deals with the EU expire, which you obviously don't understand).
Sterling is likely to fall significantly further as more information becomes available.
The Sterling didn't fall nearly as much as predicted and, if you know anything about how the market moves (which you obviously don't), you would know that after the initial, immediate market shock, following a massive political event like this, the market bounces back slightly, until it eventually stabilizes. The Sterling will likely rise through next week, though not to it's previous value.
Your comment on the possibility of England's trade deals in future being as good as those of the UK in the EU seems to be empirically false (though I do grant that there is a continuing debate about this, and there are additional factors that need to be included; I was simplifying because the "headline" result is pretty clear, and the original poster probably wouldn't understand the more nuanced position).
You say empirically false, but then say there is debate. You obviously don't understand the meaning of empiricism.
There is no "empirical" data to gauge whether trade deals will be negotiated as you can't measure something of that nature empirically. Again, you obviously don't understand what the fuck you are talking about. Further, the "headline" result is irrelevant, and there is no "nuanced position" to this issue. There are two camps, each with competing arguments: Those who think that the UK can negotiate advantageous trading deals with other countries and those who don't. And quite frankly, those who don't present some shitty arguments based around the fact that the UK is "small" (granted, there are some good arguments, I'm just saying that this is the bulk of them). This is the argument you presented and betrays your total lack of understand of how trade works. Countries that are much smaller than the UK, with economies that are far less sophisticated, and goods and services that are far less attractive to the world, have negotiated very good trade deals with much larger, more advanced, more powerful economies. The goods and services you have to offer in trade are far more relevant than almost anything else; size has little to do with it.
Additionally, to re-iterate, even if the UK can't negotiate deals that are as good as they were within the EU, they are now open to negotiate trade deals with non-European countries that they weren't previously allowed to engage in. Worried about the price of cars? Fuck the Germans, trade with Korea. Price of appliances getting to high? Trade with China. The remain camp constantly makes the "distance" argument as if it is somehow relevant to trade, but this is very obviously false and can be easily demonstrated by the fact that the US does most of it's trade with SE Asia and not Mexico and South America.
I did the calculation on future losses of public services myself, and am reasonably sure that a 3% loss in public services over 10 years is correct on the basis of the data inputs. (I took average GDP growth rates over the period since the UK joined the EU as my base case, and took the new growth rate as 0.3% lower, based on historical figures for the UK's economic performance against that of other leading EU members. Then it's just a difference of two exponentials.)
What? The way you calculated this makes no fucking sense as you have nothing to base any of this on. Any moron can pull unsubstantiated numbers out of their ass and make unsubstantiated predictions. This is just retarded in more ways than I can possibly explain.
All things considered I'm happy with my spelling and coherence. (And I'd prefer not to take spelling tips from someone who manages to mis-spell "Iliad" and "Al Qaeda"!)
Making typos isn't the same as sounding like a frothy 5-year-old throwing a fucking temper tantrum. Grow the fuck up.
[–] antiracist 2 points -2 points 0 points (+0|-2) ago
I once met an idiot mathematician who thought fucking CHANGE doesn't exist. He is totally right though because he's a mathematician.
"cite me an empirical source showing that change exists in our universe and I will concede this entire argument to you ... and write a long winded essay admitting that I was wrong that you can plaster anywhere you want over this site." -- @The_Only_Other
https://voat.co/v/atheism/comments/1064083/5315243
Archived that shit: http://archive.is/C9241
[–] TelescopiumHerscheli 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Hallo, me again. Just a small point:
Thought I'd just remind you that this just happened.
I particularly enjoyed your comment about my not knowing how ratings agencies work. I forgot to mention that a few years ago I was chief consultant mathematician to a ratings agency. :-)
[–] The_Only_Other 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
When you're right, you're right. Can't fight the truth on that one.
However, that still doesn't negate your childish fear-mongering on everything else.
[–] Antiracist10 3 points -3 points 0 points (+0|-3) ago
I crushed this dude so hard in debate. He said that if I could show change exists, then he'd believe in God. I showed change exists, and he has cowardly ignored me.
https://voat.co/v/whatever/comments/1133371/5631403
Since you're a mathematician, you might appreciate the original context, where @The_Only_Other proved himself to be a complete idiot about philosophy of mathematics also.
https://voat.co/v/atheism/comments/1064083/5315243
One of my best crushing victories over someone who is allegedly educated.
And yet Internet idiots like @nadrewod think I'm an idiot: https://voat.co/v/whatever/comments/1135970/5637219