Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 5
NSFW language (use headphones).

John Oliver discussing latest BREXIT options. It's not the full piece, but all I can find. If you have HBO you can pull it up in the on-demand section and watch it all. Sorry for the bit on Sean Hannity (you can stop the video at that point if you wish).

The main story on Sunday was about public shaming, which I may link separately. It was interesting, and gave me a new respect for Monica Lewinsky.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4uproqrBaA

I don't know that I've heard a good explanation of what happens when they don't have a "deal" for exit, or what all the ramifications are. I'm pretty sure it means that there are no trade agreements in place, which means goods will not flow smoothly in and out of Britain. I assume such would have to be negotiated individually later. Seems to me the easiest approach would be to have another vote and rescind the previous vote, because it is an excrement sandwich right now (evidently).
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
what happens when they don't have a "deal" for exit

As it stands right now, no deal would result in a Hard Exit. it would be bad for Europe and down right crushing for England.

There has some talk of a possible revote as one of the alternatives but that doesn't seem to be at the top of anyone's list that is in power - and I would expect that if that was anywhere close to a possibility, that they would have to start on it very soon simply due to the logistics of a nationwide vote. That would certainly be my preference.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I googled "Hard Brexit", and this was the first hit. Doesn't mention "Hard Brexit" anywhere, but is a very simple summary. Still doesn't really tell me a lot about ramifications.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-46318565

It expects some food prices could rise and checks at customs could cost businesses billions of pounds.

IMO, someone should cancel BREXIT even if it's politically harrowing. It is sounding like it is more harrowing not to.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
The biggest effect of hard Brexit would be a complete collapse of investment in England. That is much more catastrophic than the mere costs and inconveniences and 'dead ends' of snarls at the docks.

New capital will leave as the uncertainties and disadvantages of trade terms jinx most new investment. That leads to brain drain, and .....yetch.


david fb
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I might look around to see if I can find a better summary than that - I have not read one in quite some time but I will focus on just one industry as an example.

London is the HQ of finance and investment in Europe. If there was a hard exit (and to a lesser extent, even a negotiated exit), it is estimated that $2 trillion would leave London (and I read a recent report that the movement has already started with roughly $1 trillion already gone). Dozens if not hundreds of companies would have to relocate to mainland Europe as they could no longer have their European HQs outside of Europe. London would probably lose 20,000 direct and indirect jobs.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
That the financial industry would become "disbursed" is a bad thing?

I've read, in the past, that the concentration of finance in new York makes the US vulnerable, and that, using today's technology to spread finance more broadly across the nation, would strengthen the US. Personally, I tend to agree with this. Physical damage to one location would be less crippling. Jobs spread out across a wider area would improve economies. Technology development/buildout across a wider area, etc.

Perhaps spreading finance more broadly across Europe will ultimately be a positive?

🤨
ralph
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Perhaps spreading finance more broadly across Europe will ultimately be a positive?

That may be the case, but it does sound like it won't be a positive for London (and by extension Britain).
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
That the financial industry would become "disbursed" is a bad thing?

For London and England, absolutely. Just like it would be bad financially for New York to suffer the same.

When it comes to financials companies, they won't really end up disbursed - or at least not for very long. They will eventually congregate primarily in a single city in Europe just like they do in the US - and just like Silicon Valley does for much of tech.

Businesses like to go where the employees are and if you are a big wig in finance, you are not likely living Louisville KY.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Hawkwin: London is the HQ of finance and investment in Europe. If there was a hard exit (and to a lesser extent, even a negotiated exit), it is estimated that $2 trillion would leave London (and I read a recent report that the movement has already started with roughly $1 trillion already gone). Dozens if not hundreds of companies would have to relocate to mainland Europe as they could no longer have their European HQs outside of Europe. London would probably lose 20,000 direct and indirect jobs.
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report


I know from very little about this, but I have a recollection that Zurich was a huge banking and business center. This prompts me to wonder, "Is Switzerland a member of the EU?"

Yeah, I should look it up myself, but I will get some erudite responses giving more information.

CNC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Businesses like to go where the employees are and if you are a big wig in finance, you are not likely living Louisville KY.

Not always? I sometimes wonder about this. I live in the Phoenix area working in semiconductors. We aren't (or weren't) "silicon valley" (some say we are now). We have employees from all over the world here. They came to the business, I think, more than the business located where prospective employees were. Sometimes a business is dependent on a particular location (e.g. a mining company is likely to spring up in a mining town next to a mine; and at least historically some businesses depending on being near a river for water usage and/or transporting goods and materiel; etc).

And once established, it can be difficult to relocate depending on how much hardware or infrastructure is involved.

For some reason NYC became a financial hub. Maybe because that's where the stock market first opened? Is Bentonville, AR, a retailer hub? (I don't think so...only one retailer I'm aware of headquarters there.) Restaurant chains are HQ'd all over the country (e.g. Buca di Beppo is from Orlando, McD's is in Chicago, Applebee's is Glendale (CA), etc).

It would be difficult to attract employees to some areas as they stand (Topeka?), but municipalities could invest in themselves to become attractive to employees**.

I heard a comment recently that instead of trying to HQ in NYC, Bezos should have picked some smaller town (perhaps where a mine or mill or factory has closed), and reinvigorate it with a new source of income and prosperity (i.e. their headquarters). It could employ many locals directly, and the development of supporting businesses would employ more, and additional prospective employees would be attracted from outside as the town develops parks, river walks, dining, etc.

1poorguy

**The San Antonio River Walk, associated shopping and dining, is one that comes to mind...I think I read Pittsburgh is reinventing itself, etc.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
1pg: .I think I read Pittsburgh is reinventing itself, etc.<

Yeah, Pittsburgh has done well since losing the steel making folks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downtown_Pittsburgh

Pittsburghers are pleased to speak of the financial district as the "Golden Triangle." The Three Rivers stadium gets its name from the confluence of the Allegheny River and the Monongahela River whose joining forms the Ohio River.

Pittsburgh is cleaner and has some fine restaurants. "The Incline" is a tramway up the side of the river to some posh eateries.

I hasten to mention that my experience is very dated, seeing as I was there only on business a number of years ago,

CNC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
The Three Rivers stadium gets its name from the confluence of the Allegheny River and the Monongahela River whose joining forms the Ohio River.

Yes, your experience is dated. Three Rivers stadium on 2/11/2001

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpU7gllry4k
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
PSUE: Yes, your experience is dated. Three Rivers stadium on 2/11/2001

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpU7gllry4k


Hey! Only 19 years out of date!

CNC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I did like posting the video of the implosion instead of just saying it's no longer there.

PSU
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Total tangent, but what is it about something like that which excites people? You heard them on the video, and clearly you (and I) find it kinda fun to watch the video. Blowin' stuff up. I succumb to it, but I can't say I get it.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Is Bentonville, AR, a retailer hub?

The difference is specialization, IMO...


I heard a comment recently that instead of trying to HQ in NYC, Bezos should have picked some smaller town (perhaps where a mine or mill or factory has closed), and reinvigorate it with a new source of income and prosperity


And that would probably work for jobs that don't require a high degree of specialization or advanced degrees.

If you are a high skilled worker for a tech firm in Silicon Valley, or you are a currency swap trader in NY, it probably isn't very likely that you would be overly eager to relocate to a new company in some small or rural town and there are probably not enough qualified workers already in that geographic area that have that knowledge or experience.

That is why I think most major financial companies will likely consolidate. If your company is moving to a new location, you will want to either bring everyone with you (expensive), or pull from the local community and that will be much easier to do if you know other companies in the area already employ the type of workers you want.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Blowin' stuff up. I succumb to it, but I can't say I get it.

Blowin' stuff up is fun. You should see the huge pile of exploding fireworks we shoot off every July 4th.

PSU
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
If you are a high skilled worker for a tech firm in Silicon Valley, or you are a currency swap trader in NY, it probably isn't very likely that you would be overly eager to relocate to a new company in some small or rural town and there are probably not enough qualified workers already in that geographic area that have that knowledge or experience.

This. These types of industries tend to cluster for exactly that reason.

If you're a tech worker or financial worker, you want to be in a place where there are lots of other companies that can hire you if something changes with your current employer. That way you can find a new job without uprooting yourself (or your family) if need be. And the employers want to be in a place with lots of other workers in the field, in case they need to take on more headcount quickly, and without having to recruit people from elsewhere to uproot themselves.

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
That way you can find a new job without uprooting yourself (or your family) if need be.

Yes, that is a 'plus'. But so is cost and quality of living. I wouldn't want to go to Silicon Valley (SF) because it's phenomenally expensive. Some engineers literally live in campers in company parking lots because otherwise they wouldn't be able to save for their retirement. That also is a factor. I've been contacted a few times over the years for "silicon valley jobs", and I have no interest. I love visiting SF, but I can't imagine even trying to live anywhere in that vicinity. It's crushingly expensive, traffic is nightmarish, etc.

As an employee I would place greater weight on the quality of life in an area, and the COL in that area, than whether or not there are 20 other companies in the same industry in that vicinity. I might even tolerate a crappy company for a region I really liked (I know someone who did that...loved where he relocated, hated the company).

So I really think a larger factor for employees would be their quality of life. Good schools for the kids, affordable housing for the family, good parks and eateries and culture (movies, theater, whatever), etc. Bentonville, according to someone I know who was once a manager-level (lower) person in some sort of distribution center, is full of great shopping and theaters and such, because the employees of the company wanted all that stuff so it sprang-up. And, yes, cost of living is higher than the rest of Arkansas.

I don't think there is anything inherently better or worse in many locations, it's just a matter of what's available to people who might relocate (jobs, clean environment, good schools, etc). Communities could do what Pittsburgh did and make themselves attractive (develop "walkable" areas, parks, try to get Google Fiber, etc), or a Jeff Bezos could take advantage of lower costs of an area and locate there creating jobs which will spur the development of all that cool stuff that people want in their communities.

1poorguy
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
As an employee I would place greater weight on the quality of life in an area, and the COL in that area, than whether or not there are 20 other companies in the same industry in that vicinity.

Yeah, but you're old. :)

Many of these employees are relatively young - fresh out of engineering school (which is one of Pittsburgh's advantages with Carnegie Mellon). For the most part, they are placing a stronger emphasis on doing high-quality interesting work than almost anything else. They know that they're likely to switch employers a few times within the next ten years.

And honestly, COL means different things to different people. For olds like us, that means affordable housing for a family and high-quality middle-schools; for younger people, that might mean being close to some of the best nightlife, live music, and cutting-edge art. You can find the former in Bentonville, but not necessarily the latter.

For good or bad, the places that are likely to be most attractive to Amazon's likely employees are going to be the places that are already filled with people like Amazon's likely employees - existing high-tech hubs with lots of engineers (and employers of engineers) thick on the ground. So once you rule out expansion in the Valley, you're looking at places like NY, DC, Austin, and other existing "winner" urban areas.

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I don't think there is anything inherently better or worse in many locations, it's just a matter of what's available to people who might relocate

If one enjoys a good climate, or sports that are dependent on oceans or mountains......
Print the post Back To Top