Brexit: Now What? Part III

[Mid]

Why is it implausible that he would be much better off ?

If he got the levels of personal taxation that Trump wants for the US and the lower levels of regulation, especially financial regulation, then he stands to gain considerably.

Accounting for interest isn't a big deal IMO, cash is depreciating in real terms these days - even more so if you actually pay tax, which he mostly doesn't.

I doubt he would benefit from a large tax cut that much as a lot of his cash seems to be resting in Panama and so isn't taxed anyway:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...al-offshore-secrets-arron-banks-brexit-backer

 

[The Don]

I doubt he would benefit from a large tax cut that much as a lot of his cash seems to be resting in Panama and so isn't taxed anyway:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...al-offshore-secrets-arron-banks-brexit-backer

Looser regulation may work significantly in his favour though...

 

[Mid]

Looser regulation may work significantly in his favour though...

True enough

 

[The Don]

So is deregulation from Brexit and any benefits he might recieve from the deregulation.

True, but you were suggesting that in interest on the money "invested" in Brexit should be accounted for when considering whether it was worthwhile. I was merely pointing out that the standard way of doing that would be to consider the amount it would earn on deposit or from government bonds. By either of those measures, relative to inflation, the current return is negative.

Therefore IMO it's fair to compare the £3m-£7m (figures vary) he has spent against any future benefits without having to account for interest on that money.

 

[McHrozni]

True, but you were suggesting that in interest on the money "invested" in Brexit should be accounted for when considering whether it was worthwhile. I was merely pointing out that the standard way of doing that would be to consider the amount it would earn on deposit or from government bonds. By either of those measures, relative to inflation, the current return is negative.

Venezuelan bonds have stellar returns. You can double your money in the next two weeks with them.

It's less risky than Brexit if you ask me.

McHrozni

 

[The Don]

I agree with the last one as a possibility. The first two ... not so much. Too much risk and too many costs for too little gain.

That's your opinion, he seems to disagree. As you have already pointed out, we don't know what the likelihood of what he wants to happen occurring or how much he stands to gain but using the illustrative figures you provided - "investing" 7% of your net worth for a 50% chance of a 50% increase in net worth sounds like a good investment to me - especially if you can afford that 7%.

My point is that if he wanted to get more money there would be better ways to do so than financing Brexit.

Well he's already doing a bunch of those as well. This is in addition to his other schemes, not instead of.

Maybe. That could offset the costs he incurred thus far.

That's the thing, he may not be that bothered about immediately recouping the costs he's incurred so far - they're sunk and he may consider them to be relatively trivial - this is a much longer-term "investment".

Maybe, but again, this scheme, by itself, won't make him any money - unless he shorted the pound just before the referendum or something like that. It is just an investment that would enable him to make more money with his remaining assets sometime in the future, more than two years from now. He wouldn't just have those 7 million pounds in the bank, he could increase that to 10-15 million by the time deregulation might happen.

McHrozni

You claimed that these were not trivial sums that he can earn back quickly and easily.

I think that they are. He paid £4m in UK taxes a couple of years ago which meant that he made something in the range of £10m - £12m in UK taxable income that year. Given that most of his assets are overseas, I think it's fair to suggest that his total income is something much larger.

In that context £7m is a relatively trivial sum that he can earn back in less than 6 months.

He's using, for him, pocket change to have a shot at making a *lot* of money.

 

[abaddon]

Do the UK's signing of the GATT treaties mean that it would automatically be a member of the WTO?

WTO might be optimistic.

That I know of, there is no definitive answer on that matter. Some argue that the UK let it's membership lapse once it came under the EU umbrella and some argue that the early 70s agreement still has standing.

Either way, the 70s agreement is hardly appropriate 50 years later.

 

[The Don]

Venezuelan bonds have stellar returns. You can double your money in the next two weeks with them.

It's less risky than Brexit if you ask me.

McHrozni

I think you misunderstand.

Aaron Banks will be personally minimally affected by Brexit. Most of his money is safely overseas and his businesses are in various tax havens.

If the UK economy takes a big hit, he won't take that hit himself. Indeed he may be like Joseph Kennedy and be able to acquire all kinds of juicy UK assets if there is a fire sale following Brexit.

If Brexit is a damp squib and all that happens is that the UK economy takes a bit of a dip then he'll have lost the money he ploughed into the scheme and all he will have is the "satisfaction" that we're no longer in Europe.

OTOH if his dream scenario comes about and the UK drops its trousers on financial regulation in a desperate attempt to keep financial services in the UK he stands to make a great deal of money.

Apart from the £3m-£7m original investment - which I insist is loose change to a man like him (Stevie Gibson has ploughed at least 20 times that amount into Middlesbrough FC - that's a cruddy investment ) - it's all upside for Banks.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Do the UK's signing of the GATT treaties mean that it would automatically be a member of the WTO?

WTO might be optimistic.

See what I mean? It's gotten worse already.

 

[jimbob]

See what I mean? It's gotten worse already.

Let's also not forget Michael Howard's contribution.

Our politicians really seem to be competing with the GOP to come up with the most dangerously stupid ideas.

Maybe they really want Scotland to leave the UK.

 

[Aber]

Do the UK's signing of the GATT treaties mean that it would automatically be a member of the WTO?

WTO might be optimistic.

Yes

The issue is not the membership, but the detailed list of tariffs as we've been using the EU schedule. Easy day 1 solution should be get the Tippex out...

 

[dudalb]

I hope they pick a different shade of Blue then is used for the US Passport.......

And how did this Gilbralter business get started? I don't think that Spain, though they might like Gibralter back, are going to try to blackmail the UK into giving it back.

 

[jimbob]

I hope they pick a different shade of Blue then is used for the US Passport.......

And how did this Gilbralter business get started? I don't think that Spain, though they might like Gibralter back, are going to try to blackmail the UK into giving it back.

No, but they'd be stupid to not looking at getting concessions for not doing so.

I keep revising my opinion of the Labour and Tory party leadership downwards.

 

[Rolfe]

It's not as if this wasn't absolutely predictable.

https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2016/07/22/the-real-spanish-veto-threat/

This article is more than nine months old.

 

[jimbob]

It's not as if this wasn't absolutely predictable.

https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2016/07/22/the-real-spanish-veto-threat/

This article is more than nine months old.

Indeed - it was obvious to anyone except Brexit fanatics

 

[Strawberry]

It's not as if this wasn't absolutely predictable.

https://weegingerdug.wordpress.com/2016/07/22/the-real-spanish-veto-threat/

This article is more than nine months old.

That guy's an excellent writer, I could read him on any subject, he's one of those who could make an essay about paint drying interesting.

 

[Rolfe]

You should hear him speak. He can go on for an hour and a half without a single note, in coherent well-formed sentences without an er or an um in the mix, and hold the attention of the audience the entire time.

And that applies even if the audience has already read most of his material on the blog, or if it's their second or third time of hearing Paul speak.

Someone suggested he should be headhunted as the head of the next Yes campaign. I second that, enthusiastically. I still have more than half a suspicion that Blair Jenkins was a planted spoiler. Either that or he was the most spectacularly bad appointment it was possible to make. Which then raises the question of who was the person who appointed him working for.

Paul is one of us. He's startlingly intelligent, literate and well-read. He speaks an embarrassing number of languages. He's not an abrasive, Marmite figure like the equally brilliant Stuart Campbell - everybody likes Paul. Even more importantly, everybody knows and trusts that Paul really is on our side and wants what we want. Most of us would follow him to the end of the earth if he was leading Yes for indyref2.

 

[Strawberry]

You should hear him speak. He can go on for an hour and a half without a single note, in coherent well-formed sentences without an er or an um in the mix, and hold the attention of the audience the entire time.

And that applies even if the audience has already read most of his material on the blog, or if it's their second or third time of hearing Paul speak.

Someone suggested he should be headhunted as the head of the next Yes campaign. I second that, enthusiastically. I still have more than half a suspicion that Blair Jenkins was a planted spoiler. Either that or he was the most spectacularly bad appointment it was possible to make. Which then raises the question of who was the person who appointed him working for.

Paul is one of us. He's startlingly intelligent, literate and well-read. He speaks an embarrassing number of languages. He's not an abrasive, Marmite figure like the equally brilliant Stuart Campbell - everybody likes Paul. Even more importantly, everybody knows and trusts that Paul really is on our side and wants what we want. Most of us would follow him to the end of the earth if he was leading Yes for indyref2.

He should be writing for a national newspaper. When you think of some of the creatures that do write for national newspapers, (Katie Hopkins? Richard Littlejohn?), you have to just despair at the state of the media.

 

[Rolfe]

Nope. Well, OK he writes for "The National" newspaper. That's the only actual print paper that supports independence for Scotland. It was started simply to take advantage of the near 50% of the population who support independence and who weren't keen on the hard-line unionist line espoused by all the established titles. It's a decent paper, but it ain't the Guardian. He also writes for iScot magazine, a monthly glossy that's also aimed at the pro-independence market.

There is no possibility he'd get a column in an established newspaper, because only views supportive of the union are tolerated unless from very elder statesman journos known to be a bit eccentric (Iain Macwhirter) or from actual politicians on the pro-independence side and "well they would say that wouldn't they".

 

[McHrozni]

I think you misunderstand.

Aaron Banks will be personally minimally affected by Brexit. Most of his money is safely overseas and his businesses are in various tax havens.

If the UK economy takes a big hit, he won't take that hit himself. Indeed he may be like Joseph Kennedy and be able to acquire all kinds of juicy UK assets if there is a fire sale following Brexit.

If Brexit is a damp squib and all that happens is that the UK economy takes a bit of a dip then he'll have lost the money he ploughed into the scheme and all he will have is the "satisfaction" that we're no longer in Europe.

OTOH if his dream scenario comes about and the UK drops its trousers on financial regulation in a desperate attempt to keep financial services in the UK he stands to make a great deal of money.

Apart from the £3m-£7m original investment - which I insist is loose change to a man like him (Stevie Gibson has ploughed at least 20 times that amount into Middlesbrough FC - that's a cruddy investment ) - it's all upside for Banks.

In other words, he's a real jerk and not even doing it out of greed, but malice.

McHrozni