Britain leaves E.U.

[rconverse]

Anyone else think it's a good thing to de-globalize a little bit. I'm not saying to completely seal borders but in 2016, a lot of countries can create their own shit, employ more people, who could pay more into the system. It seems like all of this crap about how great globalization is are the super wealthy/elite. Am I the only that sees red flags with this?

[rconverse]

Originally Posted by junior94

forgive me for possibly going on too much of a tangent here, how can you sincerely say THAT ^

when you go and concede THAT ^?

sure McCain used to be a moderate Republican that liberals could like and respect, but he sold out to the whacko religious right years ago.

It's not difficult to not like any of the choices for president, similar to this election. Whether people want to admit it or not, we're all losers in 2016.

In reply to your edit: Yeah, I think there was some shit going on behind the scenes to keep Hillary out. I think BO just kind of went along for the ride. Flash forward to 2016 and you ask why would that same group that didn't support HRC in 2008 support her now? Because the alternative was Bernie Sanders, so they chose her instead of him, similar to Obama instead of her in 2008.

[junior94]

Originally Posted by rconverse

It's not difficult to not like any of the choices for president, similar to this election. Whether people want to admit it or not, we're all losers in 2016.

yea I can't remember where I saw it now, and it obviously wasn't real, but I saw a photo of a lawn with a campaign poster for both Trump and Clinton. On his it said "Trump 2016 - It Is What It Is", and on hers it said the same thing

however with her faults, he scares me far more. I'd take a career politician over a blowhard who's making it up as he goes along.

[DMBZeppelin]

Originally Posted by rconverse

Anyone else think it's a good thing to de-globalize a little bit. I'm not saying to completely seal borders but in 2016, a lot of countries can create their own shit, employ more people, who could pay more into the system. It seems like all of this crap about how great globalization is are the super wealthy/elite. Am I the only that sees red flags with this?

It be nice but I don't believe it's realistic. The world is too interconnected from a business standpoint.

No one is holding a gun to anyone's metaphorical head saying export jobs. They do it for profit, and once you get used to having that extra money you want to keep it.

So by coming back and paying American workers, they'll likely make up the difference by charging consumers more. That's even if you could entice companies to come back, which seems unlikely.

[justink]

Remember when the USSR broke up and people thought it was the end of the world?

No Union lasts forever.

This is a good move. Some people are afraid of the unknown. As long as WE are secure and have a good foreign policy in place, we will be fine. Very interested to see how it plays out.

[Julia Roberts]

Originally Posted by rconverse

Anyone else think it's a good thing to de-globalize a little bit. I'm not saying to completely seal borders but in 2016, a lot of countries can create their own shit, employ more people, who could pay more into the system. It seems like all of this crap about how great globalization is are the super wealthy/elite. Am I the only that sees red flags with this?

The super wealthy/elite will prosper in any political environment. Those families have been gaining wealth for hundreds of years.

The ones who suffer from growing pains are the same as always, the little guys.

[Tiduwho]

Originally Posted by justink

Remember when the USSR broke up and people thought it was the end of the world?

No Union lasts forever.

This is a good move. Some people are afraid of the unknown. As long as WE are secure and have a good foreign policy in place, we will be fine. Very interested to see how it plays out.

What...who thought this was anything but a planned and intentional outcome from US (and other friends) foreign policy?

[hmich176]

Originally Posted by justink

Remember when the USSR broke up and people thought it was the end of the world?

What people thought that? People in America were celebrating the demise of the USSR, not fearing the end of the world.

[Julia Roberts]

Originally Posted by hmich176

What people thought that? People in America were celebrating the demise of the USSR, not fearing the end of the world.

That's how I remember it. There were some concerns over the nukes. Where were they. Who had the red buttons.

[BTBaboon]

Originally Posted by justink

Remember when the USSR broke up and people thought it was the end of the world?

No Union lasts forever.

This is a good move. Some people are afraid of the unknown. As long as WE are secure and have a good foreign policy in place, we will be fine. Very interested to see how it plays out.

No, markets are afraid of the unknown. People are afraid of going broke/losing their jobs when markets tank because major economic players shoot themselves in the foot every 10-20 years

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by justink

This is a good move.

Absolutely

[justink]

Originally Posted by hmich176

What people thought that? People in America were celebrating the demise of the USSR, not fearing the end of the world.

"Preppers" aren't a new thing. The unstable USSR and dissolution with the fall of the Berlin Wall was a very scary unknown.

This could leave to something bigger. It may not.

[rconverse]

Seems to me that the same people saying how terrible this is are the same ones telling us how strong the markets were in 2007.

[Tiduwho]

Originally Posted by rconverse

Seems to me that the same people saying how terrible this is are the same ones telling us how strong the markets were in 2007.

Such as?

I'm always skeptical of those in power looking to stay in power, but I don't see the connection.

[rconverse]

Originally Posted by Tiduwho

Such as?

I'm always skeptical of those in power looking to stay in power, but I don't see the connection.

Like a Jamie Dymon from JPC.

I was just reading a comment on yahoo that stated if the markets lost x amount of dollars, it wouldn't have anything to do with Brexit. Companies are supposed to be valued on their ability to make long term profits. It's derivatives and speculations that may take hits, which means they're overvalued to begin with.

I don't know which side is right or if things will fall somewhere in between but that seemed to make sense to me. While the market is supposed to be forward looking it's also quite reactionary.

[RiotAct]

Originally Posted by VTDMBNH

This is what happens when you vote for a slogan or a feeling instead of educating yourself on what the hell is actually going on. Let's hope it's not foreshadowing for November.

Agreed 100%... that shit already happened in 2008 and 2012.

[RiotAct]

Beaten to it by Jake and converse on the previous page! Sheeeeit

[BTBaboon]

Originally Posted by RiotAct

Agreed 100%... that shit already happened in 2008 and 2012.

Perhaps in '08; but in the primary the alternative option was Hillary and in the general McCain had no business being considered with Palin by his side. It was a landslide for much more than a slogan.

In 2012 there wasn't a slogan at all, it was an incumbent vs. a guy who had the charisma of potato and tied himself in too many knots between his primary and then trying to pivot to the general

[Tomriddle]

Originally Posted by rconverse

Anyone else think it's a good thing to de-globalize a little bit. I'm not saying to completely seal borders but in 2016, a lot of countries can create their own shit, employ more people, who could pay more into the system. It seems like all of this crap about how great globalization is are the super wealthy/elite. Am I the only that sees red flags with this?

Certainly in the realm of possibility.

Originally Posted by rconverse

It's not difficult to not like any of the choices for president, similar to this election. Whether people want to admit it or not, we're all losers in 2016.

Yeah, somehow that keeps happening, doesn't it?

Originally Posted by scrock25

Doesn't matter who the Democratic candidate was in '08. Honestly has nothing to do with Obama.

Bush ensured nobody was going to vote in another republican at that point.

Agreed. Between that and Palin, the Democrats couldn't lose.

[dobyblue]

If people really knew what was going on, Kucinich would have been the Democratic nominee in 2008.

[Tiduwho]

That goofball Boris Johnson realized he doesn't want to be Prime Minister and figurehead of the mess he helped create.

So now what, Gove?

[BTBaboon]

Originally Posted by Tiduwho

That goofball Boris Johnson realized he doesn't want to be Prime Minister and figurehead of the mess he helped create.

So now what, Gove?

Is it just me, or does he looks like the character that Donald Trump would have been based on in a US remake of an original British TV show, a la The Office or something similar?

[cazzie34]

Originally Posted by BTBaboon

Is it just me, or does he looks like the character that Donald Trump would have been based on in a US remake of an original British TV show, a la The Office or something similar?