That podcast with keen was interesting. Especially the part about American QE and Canada, Australia, and China stabilizing their economies by continuing to borrow, with the window of credit stability closing. He did say that his reasons were more political than economic for voting to leave.

I agree that there were some rich and powerful pushing to leave, like those who want to get rid of some labour laws and capital restrictions imposed by the EU, and others who want more direct relations with Asia and the Middle East. And they certainly took advantage of the political situation, in the most irresponsible ways, to force through their economic wishes. But their are also a lot of powerful capitalists in the UK who stand to lose long term and short term, or at least think they do. So I think it’s a little more complicated than, say, the push for service privatization in the global south, where most Northern economic powers are aligned and united.

It’s not particularily encouraging that some of the few people who predicted the 2008 crisis are predicting bad things for the Chinese, Commonwealth, and European economies. Keen and Michael Hudson both were some of the only ones pointing out instability in ‘08 and they’re both pointing to some pretty rough stuff. You should check out what Varoufakis has to say about Brexit as well. Basically that the economic implications aren’t as significant as what happens with the Euro and the Chinese ecnomy, and Britain won’t be shielded either way, and the more important risk is the broader attack on democracy and growth of racism in the EU.

Here’s Chris Hedges talking with Michael Hudson, who was one of the first to outline the housing bubble and how it will collapse in ’08.

If you have the time you should read some of Yanis’s opinions on the EU in general and how it must change properly. I thought they were pretty insightful: