shyams

I plan to stay awake till 4 am at least. If it is too close to call at 4am, I will brew another pot of coffee! This decision has a HUGE impact on my/our life, but I get only ONE vote. :(

Is he suggesting that deep inside he wishes that the Leave campaign wins? His own vote is obviously secret, but I have a sneaky feeling he voted "Leave" :) If this goes bad, I blame the Labour Leadership!

Was the entire population giving false responses to Opinion Pollsters? Or are the first few results a quirk? Can't decide -- markets going crazy. Someone in the US talking about chances of a 10-year long depression in UK and the Eurozone if there is a Brexit.

More madness! A BBC reporter in a location expected to vote 50-50 said on live TV that the officials in her area expect 70% votes in favour of leave!

Yes, corrected. Multi-tasking!

Shocking! Despite most opinion polls indicating a statistically sizable win for Remain, the initial results say Britain is voting to LEAVE! :( GBP is sinking like a rock --- down to 1.43 from 1.50 at 10:00pm when polls closed.

More indications of potential stress in the financial markets: * Swiss bank UBS, another of the big six lenders that dominate the $5 trillion a day currency market, warned clients earlier this week it may fail to execute some orders on its electronic trading platform should the referendum affect liquidity or cause extreme volatility. * A note to clients from Bank of America Merrill Lynch, the currency market's fifth largest player, warned of a number of service disruptions. "BofAML's electronic trading platforms have volatility controls that may temporarily suspend execution and price streaming in response to rapid and adverse market movements," the communication said. * Reuters reports that Barclays has killed all stop loss orders in its system and won't allow new ones to be placed.

Absolutely crazy movements in the FX markets today (GBP:USD). And there have been nearly zero indications of how voting is actually progressing (although a couple of "informed" opinion pollsters say Remain has grown its lead). Another developing news (an attack on a German cinema complex) could also heighten uncertainty in the voting outcomes. Looks like a crazy roller-coaster evening/night coming up.

Fortunately, all opinion polls indicate that Remain is likely to be the outcome of today's referendum (which reminds me, I still have to vote!) I found this particular snippet very interesting! From the Guardian (see update of 12:04pm) Is he suggesting that deep inside he wishes that the Leave campaign wins? His own vote is obviously secret, but I have a sneaky feeling he voted "Leave" :) Edit: Demarcated the Guardian quote clearly from my own comment

OK, here is a digression from the discussion on political/economic "justifications" to a "what-if" discussion. Financial markets have priced in ‘Remain’ outcome in Brexit vote – but what if they are wrong? Link here: (click) The authors are making a very valid point, viz the financial markets have (erroneously) overpriced the likelihood of Remain. The markets' move to an eventual ‘Remain’ result is likely to be positive but muted. Whereas, if the eventual vote is 'Leave', the markets are likely to crash like crazy! As per the article, "... estimates of a rally in sterling to $1.50 if we stay (ie, up 3 cents), while a fall to $1.20 if we leave (down 27 cents from a current $1.47).” Interesting! Hopefully, we won't uncover that financial markets have got it wrong.

Most matches so far have begun in a boring fashion, In most cases, you wouldn't miss much if you didn't watch the first half.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/06/21/five-reasons-brexit-signal-trump-white-house/ Five Reasons Brexit could signal Trump win?!! Normally, headlines like the one above would put me off reading the whole article. However, this one is attributed to Katty Kay, a BBC journalist who has a reputation of being a thoughtful and analytical journalist. So I thought, let's post it here.... In the article, Katty says "... the [brexit] result could give us some indication of how Americans will vote in November" and goes on to list the five reasons that will influence the voting patterns as: Angry electorate Globalisation Immigration Lost pride Populism

We are not in disagreement here. However, to clarify, my point was not about the role of the EU commissioner in the refugee crisis decision-making (It's probably not for him to decide). It was that ONE leader (Mrs. Merkel) took both the decisions re. the crisis (initially saying "we're open to any numbers", then doing a volte face 6-8 months later to do a deal with Turkey that artificially bars refugees from landing within the EU). Perhaps a more constructive dialogue among leaders of 5-7 most influential nations within the EU would have led to a better decision on both occasions.

True, but "the grass is always greener on the other side" as far as voters are concerned. And, in the case of the US, Donald Trump is definitely a reflection of the voters' appetite for "greener grass", however illogical that may appear to an outsider.

I agree with the gist of what Arend has written in his thoughtful post. However, I am also convinced that his interpretation is not widely accepted within the UK. Possibly because the voters see it not as a decision based on logic alone – there is a huge emotional content intertwined as well. 1. What is the EU? It is more than what Arend has described. --- I would say that Arend has described the European Economic Community (also called the 'common market'). This is merely a subset of the EU. --- There is a VERY STRONG support in the UK for the common market. And if there is a cost of doing so (e.g. common standards, contribution to the EU budget), we mostly tend to accept it. However, the EU is also a huge political construct. And it is not the EC bureaucracy I’m talking about – it is the political class. They drive the “big decisions” within the EU – e.g. how to deal with the refugee crisis (“let’s ask Merkel”), how to deal with Greece economic crisis (“let’s ask Merkel”), what about ‘ever closer union’ (“let’s ask Hollande and Merkel”). This often makes a parody of the entire democratic foundations that the EU prides itself on. 2. What is good in the EU? I’m probably going to repeat some of the points I made on the other thread: a. A freedom of movement of the people within the EU, allowing labour to be deployed effectively within the EU. b. A powerful & effective bureaucracy that has thwarted various anti-competitive moves by corporates. It has also driven costs down (e.g. “roaming costs” for mobile phones within the EU), and is continuing to hold corporations to account (on emission standards, data regulations, food quality standards). c. EU is one of the largest opponents of GM-foods. And is a proponent of enhanced disclosures/labelling standards for food items sold within the EU. 3. What is bad in the EU? The end-state vision of a “super-state” with ever closer union. The patently undemocratic decision-making at the EU Council level. No mechanism designed within the EU to make the freedom of movement productive for the host nation. --- The so-called “benefit migration” is not entirely a myth although it is also not as big a problem as the Leave folks make it appear. --- There is a resistance to encouraging common languages within the EU (because everyone knows that English will become the dominant common language) so the host nation often finds it harder to deploy incoming workforces effectively. dave251164 wrote “Europe is heading for an even bigger and more widespread financial crisis that will effect everyone who is in it”. And although this is not top of mind for many UK voters, it is indeed a concern. In fact, I would be happy to bet a sizable amount of money that (if UK votes leave) the future for the Eurozone will be worse in 3 years’ time than that within the GBP zone. He also wrote “contempt … our Prime Minister was treated with when he went crawling on his knees, cap in hand and even then only came away with a few crumbs”. This really happened! David Cameron may have been unsavvy in his dealings with the EU leaders, but there have been many occasions where he has been treated as a pariah and had to endure humiliation. His main flaw? He (like most of the people of the UK) absolutely disagrees with the “ever closer union” And most UK voters will not give all these points any consideration. Instead, they will vote one way or another based on gut feel. I hope we vote to Remain, but I dread that the Leave campaign is not too far from a win. Edit: Naturalised British -- I have a right to vote in the referendum.

Copa America is playing a format where they do not have extra time. Instead they go straight to a penalty shoot out after the regular 90 minutes.... Sounds like a good idea to me.

Gove is 48. Assuming an average lifetime for a male Brit is 83 years, that's 35 more years. And, "in my lifetime" does not mean in the last year of his lifetime -- so he is realistically talking about 20 years. I saw the Gove referendum Q&A too. And I can say he was so much more measured than the Farages & the Johnsons of the world. And even I (a Remain voter) felt he was cogent & persuasive.

The Russian guide to Brexit According to an op-ed written in the Moscow Times (link here), Brexit offers many opportunities for Russian people. 1. Property: Any dramatic fall in the value of British pound will dramatically improve the purchasing power of Russian wealth in London. 2. Opacity: Brexit will put to a halt the recent clamoring for full disclosures of foreign investments (esp. in the property market)! 3. British political class: Cheaper, opaque and less influential, the U.K. following Brexit would be a U.K. perfectly suited to Russian interests. It would be both weaker and friendlier. 4. Opportunities within the EU: Thrown into turmoil, Brussels and Berlin would no longer be able to enforce the consensus on Russia-focused sanctions. They would have to be dropped in order to create and reward allies for the far trickier negotiations (and likely punitive trade moves) between the U.K. and the bloc. Makes for fun reading!

LOL. Vote Leave is now convincingly ahead -- even according to the FT! https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/ tracks the poll of polls. And, for the first time, they think the Leave campaign is ahead by a greater than the margin for statistical error. Bob Dylan

In all honesty, I would lead ♠J at trick 1. And I think the critical decision point would come much later in the deal.... When the robot leads ♥Q from dummy and North covers, it probably makes sense to drop the ♥10 on it. And although gordontd's opening lead worked this time, I think in principle the lead of the 10 from the trump suit is not optimal in theory.

A newspaper article from earlier in the month (link) In other words, I don't believe the headline snippets as published by the UK media here. If I were to guess, he wasn't addressing/blaming us -- he was expressing his worries for the entire EU region.

I believe you have a valid reason to call the TD, and (based on table feel) you would probably know if South used North's hesitation to their advantage. I think the point I was making was that such "small fouls" are rarely called in a match. If you've been watching Euro 2016, you will realise that the enjoyment of the game would decrease if every small foul was called! :)

I agree with Helene that (a portion) the EU is both a moderating factor and a force for good. For example, * It is the EU's insistence on urban environmental standards that has compelled the UK government to find ways to reduce urban pollution levels. * The EU has been a powerful force that faced up to, and often defeated, global giants like Microsoft or Google. * There are numerous examples of the EU blocking mergers and acquisitions that are bad from a competition angle. And where the acquisitions were forced (e.g. Lloyds Banking Group taking over Halifax etc), the EU insisted on a spin-off within a suitable timeframe (which led to TSB - a spinoff bank of a set of ex-Lloyds Bank branches). I'm sure there are many other areas that I haven't even considered.... The problem is that the EU has too many politicians, both those elected to the European Parliament, and those of the constituent nations who can exercise their power over the European bureaucracy. To a great extent, the politicians manage to defeat the bureaucrats --- in other words, the evil defeats the good. And it is highly unlikely the European Union will ever find a solution for this. Will the UK be "poorer" if they were to leave the EU? I think we will. But what do I know? I can only cast ONE VOTE!

Yes, Norway has to abide by most of the EU regulations without getting much of a say in the definition of the regulations. However, it's probably not as bad as some Norwegian politians would like to depict. In the end, a politician's default position is to feel aggreived if she/he is left out of a supermassive junket with "politicking" as the main course and lavish parties & treats as desserts. An issue for Norway is that it's not big enough to have a clout within the EU, even if it were in it. Ask the Dutch how much their government shapes EU policies (miniscule) vs. obeys EU policies (quite diligently). In contrast, the UK is massive in terms of proportion of EU economy, EU population, political clout (UK has loads of "soft power" in the world), and intra-EU clout (i.e. ability to resist excesses of the EU political machinery). A Brexit will be a huge blow to the EU (even if they pretend like they will be unaffected). And many countries in the EU know it... The unfortunate part is, when it comes to any multilateral negotiations, every country in the EU is busy trying to get the best cuts of meat -- even when no country offers to go hunt for meat. It's not their fault, really -- it's that the EU machinery is designed such that countries are required to fight for every concession, every right, before it ever gets included into EU common policy. Finally, if UK actually votes to Leave, the very politicians who humiliated David Cameron repeatedly during the so-called "UK's reform deal with EU" will come to rue the day they forgot to look at the big picture. Another discordant feature of the EU is the disproportionate power wielded by the three main countries (Germany, France, UK). In a democracy, rights and powers are (meant to be ) commensurate to population size. Germany is 11% of EU population -- yet, it probably holds ~50% of the political power. Angela Merkel was, for all practical purposes, the person who decided how the whole of the EU deals with Greece (during their ongoing "default" scenarios). I'd be surprised if even 1% of those who know the name of Germany's Finance Minister (Wolfgang Schäuble) can name the French counterpart. If Brexit does occur, it will not be long before the rest of the EU establishment is brought to its knees --- both from within (i.e. national governments defying the EU) and from outside (financial markets tearing the Euro to shreds). One hopes the EU survives this ordeal...

Our results were posted previously. To summarise: shyams vs. steve2005 --- shyams won shyams vs. thymepuns --- thymepuns won thymepuns vs. steve2005 --- thymepuns won