Re: "Brexit"
 

Italian bonds are governed by Italian law, they are not governed by US law like the Argentinian ones. When the euro was created, an Italian law converted the public debt from lire to euros. Likewise, were Italy to leave the Eurozone, an Italian law will be able to convert all the debt back to lire, at the official exchange rate of the time lira will be reintroduced, and there won't be any default. If after that, the lira will lose some of its value against the euro, it won't be a default either, because the bonds won't be payable in euros anymore, but in lire.

Re: "Brexit"
 

'Likewise, were Italy to leave the Eurozone, an Italian law will be able to convert all the debt back to lire, at the official exchange rate of the time lira will be reintroduced, and there won't be any default'.

Lenders would not accept this. (They're not that nice). Italy would be closed out of all international bond markets so borrowing internationally in lire would be virtually impossible. A political impasses lasting for years would follow with no prospect of refinancing international debt as it became due.

And, at any rate, lire interest rates would skyrocket from day one to such an extent (20% plus) that a default would be inevitable within days.

Look at whats been happening in Greece for the past few years (and they are still holding in because rightly or wrongly, the dominant view is that a Grexit would be even more unpalatable). Italxit I'm afraid, would be a lot more messy.

Re: "Brexit"
 

The lenders would be forced to accept it. Italy is not Greece, nor Argentina. Its debt is one of the biggest in the world, an Italian disorderly default would jeopardize the global financial market much more than the 2007 crisis, therefore Italy it's too big to fail.

Re: "Brexit"
 

Certainly to make Italy fail would be a big, dangerous decision, but it's not something you can count on indefinitely. Also allowing Italy to slide further and further into debts it will never pay would be a big, dangerous decision.

We've got the old vicious circle: you try to balance the books by raising taxes and reducing spending, but this reduces economic activity and therefore incomes and therefore income tax revenue. This increases borrowing requirements and therefore debts. And this applies to all countries - it's not as if Germany, Britain and France don't have big public debts, even if they're smaller than Italy's.

Re: "Brexit"
 

The lenders would be forced to accept it. Italy is not Greece, nor Argentina. Its debt is one of the biggest in the world, an Italian disorderly default would jeopardize the global financial market much more than the 2007 crisis, therefore Italy it's too big to fail.
But will President Trump understand this, or will he just tell the Europeans that its their problem?

Re: "Brexit"
 

'The lenders would be forced to accept it'.

Er No. Why would they? I wouldn't. You owe me €100, you pay me €100 or a hard equivalent of it. I really don't want these Panini stickers (they're all doubles anyway).

Italy has a huge national debt. Think of it as a big mortgage. Interest payments are low so the debt is affordable. Without low interest rates it wouldn't be possible to cover the interest payments. Why are rates so low? Answer. They are set by the ECB (and Dragi's we will do whatever is needed to maintain the single currency).

'Too big to fail'.....Not anymore. Biggest losers, the Italian banks and their depositors. (anyone with any money in an Italian bank is not going to come out of an Italexit too well). And as Modicasa says, Trump is not going to be too worried about US bank exposure. (insignificant in the general scale of things, - as is UK and German exposure). So, ultimately, it's highly unlikely that the financial system is going to go into meltdown. (especially since a concerted liquidity exercise by the Fed and other world central banks would follow). (Sardinia quite possibly would be sold at auction....joke mmmmbuti).

Anyway, this is about Brexit. Which is not going to happen IMHO. And would not be a good idea. Again IMHO.

But all contrary arguments gratefully accepted.

Re: "Brexit"
 

So getting out of a system that regulates via unelected officials the permits and licences you need even to fart, and how loud and how smelly that fart should be, is not a good idea?? I now realise that a lot of people just can't remember when in G.B. you could just come up with an idea, and go into business with it, and off you went. Maybe you needed to comply with some mild local bye-law, but that was it.

Re: "Brexit"
 

Now in the interests of fair reporting, the 'Leave' vote has had a big resurgence in the last 72 hours. The probability of Remain winning is down by around 8% from 83% to 75%.

Re: "Brexit"
 

I thought this was good

Ridiculing Brexiters is a sure way to lose the argument for staying in the EU | Gary Younge | Opinion | The Guardian

Re: "Brexit"
 

JOnwel - And who would you rather see in place of the clown? The tosspot or the gibbering idiot?

Re: "Brexit"
 

Personally I think it's all a conspiracy to stop me from ever getting hold of any decent pork pies or Shippham's sandwich spread ever again.

Canada agrees an FTA with the EU, it's about to go to the European Parliament and the UK figures out a way to screw the whole thing up.

Typical. :sneaky:

Although looking at the ingredients, it's possible the salmon shippham's may be importable, I shall have to check with the CFIA.

Re: "Brexit"
 

As I said, there's no one to replace him!
What I object to is his threat to resign if he loses the referendum. If he were honest, he'd keep his mouth shut about resigning or staying and ask people to judge the referendum on its merits. If he loses, it's up to him to decide then whether he wants to carry on governing or withdraw to a comfortable, carefree retirement at the age of 41.

About Brexit: I agree with the Guardian article - the best thing the stayers can do is keep a low profile.

Re: "Brexit"
 

Jonwel I agree, I think his threat to resign is a double edged sword. The reform we need, and it shouldnt be a 'political' reform but rather a structural one. Berlo is being all mouthy, but he spent 20 years saying teh reform was needed. Now he's against it in an attempt to bring down renzi. I think he's the best of a bad bunch, but im more infuriated with his taking verdini and cronies on board than threatening to resign. And yesterday he announced he's staying till 2023.

Re: "Brexit"
 

Listening to the EU referendum last week just about become a UK general election, I was thinking how the whole debate just isn't doing justice to the EU cause. I hear a lot of negative arguments, I hear little about the potential and benefits of the EU. I hear Brexiteers talking about how undemocratic the EU is and I hear no mention of how only 24% of the UK population voted for the current government and how the whole upper house of the British Parliament is UNELECTED.

I am also beginning to think that actually there is a conflict of interest that is creating a lack of "rebuttle" from the Remain camp. For example, last week on Any Questions on BBC TV, there was a war veteran that was ranting on about how he was made to leave Spain because the authorities there suddenly decided to stop renewing his health card. He was not yet retirement age, and was supporting himself in Spain with his Ukrainian partner.

Suddenly without notice he was made to return back to the UK because "Europe" was now preventing him, a war hero, from receiving state health care in Spain. Of course, all the OUTERS in the audience applauded him thunderously.

Nobody, but NOBODY on the panel nor David Dimbleby for that matter informed him (or indeed the millions watching) that, in fact, it was the BRITISH GOVERNMENT that decided to withdraw that benefit from him. It was the BRITISH GOVERNMENT that stopped that for him. It was them who stopped the S1 certificates for Britons under retirement age from receiving health care abroad in 2014.

But of course, a Tory Minister, let alone Cameron or Osborne, aren't going to offer up that information are they?

It therefore comes across to me that Cameron is not actually the person to be fronting the Remain campaign because of conflict of interest.

Re: "Brexit"
 

From a 'shoe in' two weeks ago, the 'Remain' vote continues to lose ground according to the financial markets and the bookmaking fraternity. Probability of a Remain vote is now down to just under 70%.