Warning of downward spiral, IMF sees no economic upside to Brexit

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By David Milliken and William Schomberg


http://i.imgur.com/4M7iiEe.jpg

LONDON (Reuters) - International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde said on Friday there were no economic positives to Britain leaving the European Union and that the impact would range from "pretty bad to very, very bad".

Her blunt warning came as the IMF said the country risks falling into a spiral of weaker economic growth, lower house prices and diminished foreign investment if voters opt to leave the European Union after the referendum next month.

The fund, in an annual report on Britain's economy, said an exit vote would "precipitate a protracted period of heightened uncertainty, leading to financial market volatility and a hit to output."

A sudden stop to investment in key sectors of the economy such as commercial real estate and finance could exacerbate Britain's record-high current account deficit, the report said.

"Such market reactions could sharply contract economic activity, further depressing asset prices in a self-reinforcing cycle," the Fund said. It also repeated a warning that a Brexit shock could upset the global economy.

British voters have been bombarded with Brexit warnings in recent weeks. On Thursday, the Bank of England said the economy would slow sharply, and possibly even enter a brief recession, a possiblility backed by Lagarde on Friday.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has also warned that British voters risk paying a "Brexit tax" equivalent to a month's salary by 2020 if they leave the EU.

Lagarde said the Fund would publish detailed forecasts for the size of a Brexit hit to Britain's economy probably on June 16, a week before the referendum and the same day that finance minister George Osborne and BoE Governor Mark Carney are due to make high-profile speeches at the annual Mansion House dinner.

"LAUGHABLE"

Anti-EU campaigners hit back at the IMF quickly, questioning the Fund's authority when it comes to forecasting.

"Very few people in the media ever pause to ask that question, but its track record is laughable," Arron Banks, a co-founder of the Leave.EU group, said. "Its forecasts are never right, it backed the euro and it didn't see the financial crisis coming."

Vote Leave, the official "Out" campaign, said Britain was being bullied by the IMF.

So far, the barrage of warnings about the economy do not appear to have swayed many voters. Opinion polls show Britons believe staying in the EU would be best for the economy but they are more or less evenly split on how they intend to vote.

Lagarde defended the Fund's decision to publish a report that closely echoed the warnings of Prime Minister David Cameron and finance minister Osborne who worked closely with Lagarde when she was France's finance minister.

"We are not doing it out of politics, this is not the job of the IMF. We're doing it because it's a significant downside risk. And second, it's not just a domestic issue ... it's an international issue," she said.

The IMF said Britain, after a Brexit vote, could take years to renegotiate trade deals with the EU and other countries, hitting investment and weighing heavily on economic sentiment.

[Goofy]

Politics seriously bores me to tears :lol:

[FBD]

fuck you lagarde, you pricks are doing all of this on purpose to strip mine and debt-enslave the world

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/04/government-officials-admit-economic-military-false-flag-operations.html

[FBD]

------------------------------

All Brits need to read this, vote in or out, we will be kept in...

"The machinery to keep the UK as part of the EU was decided long before the referendum was announced.

The referendum is just a safety valve to placate those citizens upset by the way they have little say in how their affairs are decided. It's a bit like last year's Magna Carta celebrations. Yes there was a party and much pomp and pagentry but the media was not allowed to discuss the substance of Magna Carta. Any mention of habeus corpus; the power given under Magna Carta to order the government to produce a prisoner and then justify in open court why the prisoner was being detained, had been silently discarded by the government and Ministry of Justice. There was very little discussion of this because of the censorship and the celebrations which diverted the public's mind away from the real importance of Magna Carta.

They are able to do this by the clerks in the high court referring all such complaints to the administrative side of the courts.

Here an understanding of how the courts work is necessary.

At a time which is not certain, because I doubt that it was recorded, but I guess about ten years ago, one could go to the Royal Courts of Justice in the Strand and lay a complaint at common law that someone had caused you harm or loss. There would be no charge to lay such a complaint, neither would there be any court costs because as Magna Carta dictates - justice should be free and available to all.
About that time Lord Levenson introduced his Guide to the Queens Bench.
https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/qb-guide-2016-fi... (https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/qb-guide-2016-final-2.pdf)

In this he describes the three different catagories of Queens Bench but omits the fourth, the common law court of record. Who knows precisely why he did that; but a fair guess is that any one UK resident could make a complaint at common law that his prime minister had caused him harm by giving away his sovereignty. The judge in a common law court goes on his oath of office. If he does not follow precedent he can be sued. In all other courts although the man with a sheeps wool wig (Wolf in sheep's clothing?) is called a judge in law he is not a judge. He is just a clerk working for the company known as the ministry of justice. This is why they are called administrative courts which conduct the business of the court. These pretend judges cannot be sued because the rules of the business, a statute also called an act with exactly the same meaning as a stage act, created by parliament, has given these clerks a protected status. This means that they do not have to follow the rules of law that the rest of the population have to do. You might now understand why some very strange decisions are made by these pretend judges.
One persistent man was able to get past the Clerks at Royal Courts of Justice but when he tried to present his case at common law, the judge said he had no jurisdiction because he refused to go on his oath of office.

You might now be wondering what this has to do with the referendum. It's because Cameron has already stated that he will use the Lisbon treaty to leave the EU if the vote is to leave. Bear in mind that when in opposition, Cameron rubbished the Lisbon treaty. He knows that it was designed by unelected bureaucrats to make it difficult for any country to leave and anyway is subject to qualified majority voting.
After June the 23rd and we vote to exit the EU, the population will breathe a sigh of relief that it's all over and leave it to the politicians to get on with it; after all isn't that what we pay them for.?.

This is where Cameron and Osborne are correct. All parties agree that it will take at least two years of negotiations during which time the uncertainty will cause the predicted depression in the economy. This will reverse most of the opinions of the leave group who will change their mind and agree to stay in.
During which time Parliament will vote through the bill which is waiting in the wings, having already been debated and just waiting to be signed into law.

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2013-14/rightsofthesovereignandthedu... (http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2013-14/rightsofthesovereignandtheduchyofcornwall.html)
Act not reported in the media removes from the Queen the duty to veto a bill that is against her subject's sovereignty.

You might be puzzling and wonder what this has to do with Parliament's duty to act in the public's interest. Wonder no more.

Before 1972 when Prime Minister Edward Heath signed the Treaty of Rome for us to join the common market, now the EU. he asked the top law officer at the time the legal implications of signing the treaty. This man, the Lord Chancellor Lord Kilmuir described our constitution evolving from Magna Carta and even before, and wrote that giving away our sovereignty to another state would be illegal. Heath still signed it and misled parliament by stating that there was no loss of sovereignty. Before he died he admitted his conduct in his memoirs.

Here an understanding of the international law of treaties will help you see what the government's problem is and what is really is motivating them. Any treaty where fraud or deception is used is immediately null and void. So since 1972 when more illegal treaties have been signed the government has kept this fact from you. The letter was hidden under the thirty year rule but was prized from the archives by an activist. Then the government machine was cranked up to block any move to expose the subject to the public. The media know of the letter but dare not discuss it. The eurosceptic politicians know of the letter but will not admit in public to it's existence. So you have the British public in a state of confusion with all the lying statistics from both sides of the Brexit argument. Don't you think that their minds would be clarified if they knew that we had joined the EU by power mad controllers who lied to them?



There is one silver lining to this cloud. The government's censorship must have been so good that the parliament petitions committee did not realise the significance of a petition presented to them =
"We require Lord Kilmuir's letter to Edward Heath be debated in parliament". The letter can be read from a link on this site.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/122770
If this petition gets to 10,000 before 23rd June, the government has to comment on it. This should release those previously censored as the letter's existence would be acknowledged on a government's own site.

The problem is that the petition has such a boring and obscure title and more importantly even the so called alternative media with the notable exception of Don Hank and Rodney Atkinson whose site "Freenations" promotes it. Rodney Atkinson was the man who together with Norris McWhirter took John Major, Francis Maude and Douglas Hurd to court for Misprison of treason for signing the Maastricht Treaty. The attorney general then took it over and said there was no case to answer; presumably when not being on his oath of office.

So dear reader, if you live in the UK, please sign the petition and get everyone you know to sign it.
Think about it; if you are caught doing something wrong you have to stop doing it. Get this letter's contents into the public domain and you can then demand that the treaties be declared null and void so that the laws that gave away our sovereignty back to 1972 would revert back to the position pertaining in 1972.

Follow the thought through and you will realise that our exclusive 12 mile fishing boundary would be returned over night. Alright there might be some stock market jitters but the jitters felt by the other EU countries would cause them to consider what best suits them is for our trading arrangements to remain the same. The European army and other evils we could just walk away without too much trouble. So please do not let these politicians confuse you by their convoluted rhetoric. The matter is clear and simple. The EU treaties are against our laws. We the people need to get this fact out to one and all."

[Hugh_Janus]

:tldr:

bullet points pls

[FBD]

its not just illegal as juxtaposed with english law, its fucking illegal, mate :tup:

[Jezter]

If Brexit happens, will be interesting to see how many other big ones will hop on that train.

[redred]

:popcorn:

[FBD]

If Brexit happens, will be interesting to see how many other big ones will hop on that train.

depends on whether or not they actually check to see if the EU violates the hell out of their national laws

[FBD]

https://mishtalk.com/2016/06/01/brussels-extends-juncker-plan-outside-eu-to-immigration-projects-uk-the-biggest-contributor/

British citizens seeking yet another reason to vote Brexit, have one in spades.

The roots of this reason go back to last year when European Commission president Jean Claude Juncker hatched a 3-year plan to leverage €20 billion in seed capital to produce a €300 billion gain in Eurozone investment.

As one might expected, the results are nonexistent even though Juncker has already used up the €20 billion in seed capital.

Juncker now wants to up the seed capital, make the plan permanent, and extend the plan outside the EU to immigration zones such as Syria and Africa!

Here’s the kicker. The UK ponied up the biggest share of this monstrous boondoggle so far.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DT7bX-B1Mg