...clearly biased publication.) Left or Right, I wouldn't trust any Op Ed from the NYT as far as I could throw it these days.

I stand by every single point I have made on this board about the "Brexit", and there is nothing in your linked NYT "scare piece" or any other that would make me reconsider. The author completely disregards the benefit (at least under the current prevailing global economics paradigm) to the UK of a lower pound, and fails to consider the entirety of the UK's trade (and other) relationships with the EU in evaluation how "tough" the EU will be and how "hurt" the UK will be.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it is no longer the centralists and globalists "driving the bus" in Europe (witness the latest elections in Spain). It is no longer a question of "treating the UK harshly" to keep other countries in line, but, rather, loosening their grip so as not to further fan the flames of resistance/revolution. To quote "Star Wars: "The more you tighten your fist, the more systems will slip through your fingers."

Quite simply, Brexit itself, and what it portends, is not a disaster for anyone except the global elitists and power brokers. While there may be some short to short-midterm volatility or (GASP) weakness in global financial markets, in the long run the global economy (and the individual economies, and citizens) that comprise it, will be healthier. Particularly if this ends up ultimately bringing down the prevailing suicidal/sociopathic "central bank/central planners as all-powerful gods" paradigm and causing a REAL financial/finance-world reset as should have happened in '08-09. If this were REALLY the disaster that the now-fearful "elites" and their MSM stooges were pretending it is, the S&P 500 would have done a lot more than merely falling 5%back into (and into the top part, at that) a two-year trading range, especially given that fundamentals (valuations at an all-time high by many metrics, with corporate profits plummeting) are not exactly stellar. The worlds' central banks can staunch a lot of bleeding, but not if it becomes clear that their control of the situation is ebbing in the least (which is what the kind of "disaster" prescribed would portend.)

[Post edited by EAPo at 06/27/2016 4:48PM]