Brexit: the referendum

[jimbob]

Meanwhile from Facebook:

Professor Brian Cox
22 hrs ·

Did Farage really just say that if we leave the EU we'll have a smaller pharma industry and that will be good for alternative medicine ?

 

[CapelDodger]

I don't like the way the Thatcherite policy of raising the pension age for women from 60 to 65 was suddenly introduced a few years ago under EU austerity with hardly a whisper from the journalists at the Daily Mail about the matter.

This "EU austerity" is what the Socialist Workers are pushing up in Queen Street, and I'd love to know what it means. I did ask but got no sensible reply.

Osborne's austerity I understand, and German austerity, and the Greek thing, but what on Earth does the EU have to do with it?

On the pension age, I was informed long ago that my retirement age had gone up to 66 and would go no higher. I don't resent it at all.

 

[Ambrosia]

Brexit is Russian Roulette with 5 out of 6 chambers loaded, and your not quite sure about the sixth either...

Hyperbole.

The Brexiters like to promote the notion that we are too big a trading partner for the EU not to make favourable deal with.

We are too big an economy for countries not to do trade deals should we exit the EU.

People are lining up, and the news is full of talking heads who all decry us leaving the EU, all of them saying that effectively it would be economic armageddon, or some variant thereof.

I'm not saying that things wouldn't be a rough for a while. The Remain supporters, imho, are all overplaying this though. I don't believe that post exit things would turn out nearly as bad as some people are claiming, and I think that in the long run. i.e. 10-20 years after Brexit, the country, and the economy would be better off without the EU.

My postal vote is done, and I have voted Leave.

I actually think Remain will win the vote by about 60/40 and we'll still be an EU member for as long as I'm alive.

I do think though that if a significant portion of the UK votes Leave, that perhaps in time the EU can get reformed to something better if the result ends up as remain.

 

[Ambrosia]

with hardly a whisper from the journalists at the Daily Mail about the matter.

Calling the people who write the Daily Mail "journalists" is being exceedingly kind.

 

[CapelDodger]

If anyone votes leave on consideration of such a single issue, and my heart sinks when I hear of so many who will, then it is a sad day indeed for the UK's future. What wil be the relevance of such a single issue in fifty, a hundred years from now? The most important thing is maintaining and increasing communication and co-operation among as many peoples as possible. Well, that's my very strongly held opinion.

I agree absolutely. The future surely lies beyond the nation-state, whatever form it takes, and the EU is a step in that direction. To step back in futile defence of "national sovereignty", which has no long-term future, is a loser's play, frankly. For it to happen on the back of what is for many a protest vote should damn referendums forever.

It also guarantees permanent government by Tory-boys. Small-fry in Europe but big fish in the little pond of England. (Yes, England; the rest of us will opt for the future, just you watch).

 

[CapelDodger]

People are lining up, and the news is full of talking heads who all decry us leaving the EU, all of them saying that effectively it would be economic armageddon, or some variant thereof.

Look away from the talking heads to the institutions which have given a very measured opinion that Leave will bring economic harm even in the long-term. No armageddon, no hyperbole, just rational cases clearly laid out.

I'm not saying that things wouldn't be a rough for a while.

Things are rough as it is; we don't need it any rougher for an indeterminant while.

 

[CapelDodger]

As someone else posted one of the weaknesses that is a direct result of UK legislation (with nothing to do with the EU) we have in the UK is how easy it is for a company to close a plant and relocate it elsewhere because we are "business friendly". To do the same in say Germany or France would probably cost a company a lot more, have to involve lengthy negotiations with unions and government and so on - all of which adds to the cost of opening a new plant elsewhere perhaps even enough that would make such a move uneconomic.

Given current events, I doubt much investment diverted from the UK will go to France. Too much sentimental attachment to the spirit of the barricade. Slovakia sounds like a much better bet.

 

[Lothian]

Hyperbole.
.

That doesn't sound like something I would say and clicking on the link doesn't take me to a post where I said that. Can you check where you got it from?

 

[The Don]

We are too big an economy for countries not to do trade deals should we exit the EU.

The trouble with this is that trade deals are expensive and time consuming to put together. There are probably a handful of people in the UK who are able to negotiate a good trade deal and they'll be very busy negotiating all those trade deals.

While this is going on, our exporters will be suffering. Counties will try their best to make it as difficult as possible for our exporters whilst making it as easy as possible for theirs.

People are lining up, and the news is full of talking heads who all decry us leaving the EU, all of them saying that effectively it would be economic armageddon, or some variant thereof.

That's a bit of hyperbole there. The talking heads are talking about single-digit impacts on GDP and "maybe" another recession. The UK economy is still in a fragile state, why would you even risk this

I'm not saying that things wouldn't be a rough for a while.

Why would anyone deliberately want to damage their own economy ?

The Remain supporters, imho, are all overplaying this though. I don't believe that post exit things would turn out nearly as bad as some people are claiming, and I think that in the long run. i.e. 10-20 years after Brexit, the country, and the economy would be better off without the EU.

How will we be better off ?

What is the EU doing that prevents us exporting to non-EU markets ?

How will more expensive labour make us more competitive on the world stage ?

As I pointed out upthread, the ways in which the UK could become more competitive (i.e. cheaper) would necessarily have a negative impact on consumers, workers and the environment.

My postal vote is done, and I have voted Leave.

I actually think Remain will win the vote by about 60/40 and we'll still be an EU member for as long as I'm alive.

I wish I shared your optimism. I'm fully expecting to have to wind up my business following a Brexit. "Fortunately" without EU protections it'll be a lot cheaper and easier for me to sack my employees

I do think though that if a significant portion of the UK votes Leave, that perhaps in time the EU can get reformed to something better if the result ends up as remain.

To to that, the UK needs to engage instead of behaving like a spoiled child.

 

[3point14]

I'm not saying that things wouldn't be a rough for a while. The Remain supporters, imho, are all overplaying this though. I don't believe that post exit things would turn out nearly as bad as some people are claiming, and I think that in the long run. i.e. 10-20 years after Brexit, the country, and the economy would be better off without the EU.

What are your qualifications to make this assessment?

On which metrics are you basing your assessment? Can we see the thought process?

 

[The Don]

An interesting headline-making story

Tory MP Sarah Wollaston has quit the campaign to leave the EU and will vote for Remain instead, she told the BBC.

Dr Wollaston, chairman of the health select committee, said Vote Leave's claim that Brexit would free up £350m a week for the NHS "simply isn't true".

She told the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg she did not feel "comfortable" being part of the campaign.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36485464

Personally I don't believe the story. Firstly, the Brexit campaign has never promised £350m a week for the NHS, they have incorrectly stated that the UK's net contribution is £350m a week and have promised large chunks of it at various times to the NHS, the farmers, UK industry, tax cuts, and deficit reduction but at no point in time have they offered the whole sum.

To me this looks more like "politician thinks they see which way the wind is blowing and switches sides based on self-interest".

OTOH, if she really has switched sides based on actual evidence then good for her !

 

[welshdean]

That doesn't sound like something I would say and clicking on the link doesn't take me to a post where I said that. Can you check where you got it from?

It's here -

The fundamental problem is rather akin to the amount of money I spend on petrol to drive to work, imagine what I could with that money if I wasn't giving it all to BP! Of course there's the slight issue that If I don't spend that money to drive to work I won't have a job, and hence no income anyway.

The harsh reality is that the cost of 'saving' this money will be so high as to render it meaningless.

Same with immigration. 300,000 extra people every year is the figure they like to bandy about, ignoring that half of that is from outside the EU and of course that those immigrants from the EU in professions where the UK has skill shortages would still have to be allowed in.

The Brexiters like to promote the notion that we are too big a trading partner for the EU not to make favourable deal with. Leave aside the question of how much of that trade only exists because of a liberal business environment combined with EU membership. The EU is not monolith, every individual nation is going to have to sign off on a new deal, what if the countries who benefit most from the free movement of people simply decide to veto a deal that doesn't include it?

Brexit is Russian Roulette with 5 out of 6 chambers loaded, and your not quite sure about the sixth either...

 

[3point14]

Ignore.

I really must learn to pay attention...

 

[Lothian]

It's here -

Cheers. I didn't think it was me. I would have been more informative, convincing, witty and sexy.

 

[Archie Gemmill Goal]

Hyperbole.

We are too big an economy for countries not to do trade deals should we exit the EU.

True and not true at the same time.

We are a big economy. No doubt it would be in the interests of the EU to have a trade deal with us. But it would be in their interest to have a trade deal with China, the US and India moreso I would think. So those things would probably be higher priorities.

The question is also what the terms of the deal would be. As good as we get currently? Unlikely. Unless we also agree to accept the things that people want to leave the EU to avoid.

About half of UK exports go to the EU. While a deal is worked out those would all be at risk. We'd also put at risk the portion traded via EU agreements. We've just put in place a FTA with Korea for example. It significantly reduces the high tariffs on Scotch whisky as just one example we leave the EU they go back on no doubt. And now someone from the UK government has to negotiate a deal with Korea.

on the other end, EU countries would stand to lose too. But they're risking maybe 4 or 5% at worst of their GDP. Probably a lot less for some countries. Now in a deal where someone stands to lose 50%+ of their wealth and the other 5% or less who is going to blink first?

Also consider what the practical solution to the issue might be. We vote leave and Cameron goes to the EU and what will he say? I'd bet something like 'how can we preserve as much of what we already have with the EU?' and the EU will probably say 'keep following all our rules, keep paying us money (maybe a bit more for good measure), just like Norway and you can still play'

Or do you send in a Farage to do the job? And alienate the people we are trying to do deals with?

How exactly does all of this play out while the economy suffers, people lose their jobs and companies move out?

Do you think that banks, multinationals and exporters are going to sit around and do nothing while the rough economy plays out for a few years in the hope of jam tomorrow?

 

[Tolls]

Personally I don't believe the story. Firstly, the Brexit campaign has never promised £350m a week for the NHS, they have incorrectly stated that the UK's net contribution is £350m a week and have promised large chunks of it at various times to the NHS, the farmers, UK industry, tax cuts, and deficit reduction but at no point in time have they offered the whole sum.

Well, I'm fairly sure that one of those ads that Leave had was all about how much would be achieved in the NHS if we didn't hand over 350mill a week. At least that was the clear implication.

Has anyone actually tried to pin them down on where this (inaccurate) amount was actually going to be spent? Farage claimed in that thing with Dave a couple of nights ago that even with tariffs it would still cost less than the amount saved. So that's another thing to add to the list of stuff this is supposed to cover.

So it has to cover any economic contraction, cover any loss for the farmers, investment in the NHS, tax cuts, etc etc. Is there actually anything left in this mythical pot?

 

[Henri McPhee]

I don't like the way the EU supported the bugging of politicians and bankers and businessmen, and the bugging of lawyers and journalists and doctors. The silly thing is they don't seem to mind or object, even if they know about it. That's with all these decisions taken behind closed doors, and never reported in the media. All this bank fraud by criminal fraudster foreigners stealing the life savings of the elderly by cyberfraud started with the EU.

It's partly the fault of that 'Call me Tony' Blair with his desire for regime change in Iraq and Syria and Libya, and his support for Isis and Al Qaeda. Tony Blair needs some lessons in military strategy and political foresight, and even some lessons in the history of the Middle East, even though he seems to be good at making money. I suppose he thinks we should all become sports agents now.

In theory there should be peaceful settlements. Instead we have perpetual war and death and destruction, and endless negotiations, and it's not the rich who suffer.

I don't like European Political Union if it means Nato expansion into Russia. It's like living in Turkey, with a mad sultan, and with the UK becoming another backward country with an inefficient civil service.

 

[The Don]

I don't like the way the EU supported the bugging of politicians and bankers and businessmen, and the bugging of lawyers and journalists and doctors. The silly thing is they don't seem to mind or object, even if they know about it. That's with all these decisions taken behind closed doors, and never reported in the media.

It's partly the fault of that 'Call me Tony' Blair with his desire for regime change in Iraq and Syria and Libya, and his support for Isis and Al Qaeda. Tony Blair needs some lessons in military strategy and political foresight, and even some lessons in the history of the Middle East, even though he seems to be good at making money. I suppose he thinks we should all become sports agents now.

In theory there should be peaceful settlements. Instead we have perpetual war and death and destruction, and endless negotiations, and it's not the rich who suffer.

I don't like European Political Union if it means Nato expansion into Russia. It's like living in Turkey, with a mad sultan, and with the UK becoming another backward country with an inefficient civil service.

Even if any of the above were true, the UK has repeatedly shown itself to be the willing ally/lackey/poodle of the U.S. and its foreign endeavours. If anything the E.U. has been a tempering influence. Post Brexit the U.K. would be free to slavishly follow President Trump into various wars in the Middle East, with Mexico and with China.

 

[gypsyjackson]

I don't like the way the EU supported the bugging of politicians and bankers and businessmen, and the bugging of lawyers and journalists and doctors. The silly thing is they don't seem to mind or object, even if they know about it. That's with all these decisions taken behind closed doors, and never reported in the media. All this bank fraud by criminal fraudster foreigners stealing the life savings of the elderly by cyberfraud started with the EU.

It's partly the fault of that 'Call me Tony' Blair with his desire for regime change in Iraq and Syria and Libya, and his support for Isis and Al Qaeda. Tony Blair needs some lessons in military strategy and political foresight, and even some lessons in the history of the Middle East, even though he seems to be good at making money. I suppose he thinks we should all become sports agents now.

In theory there should be peaceful settlements. Instead we have perpetual war and death and destruction, and endless negotiations, and it's not the rich who suffer.

I don't like European Political Union if it means Nato expansion into Russia. It's like living in Turkey, with a mad sultan, and with the UK becoming another backward country with an inefficient civil service.

What's this about bugging?

Why bring up Blair? How is he important?

In what way is NATO expansion into Russia (which won't happen) like living in Turkey?

 

[Information Analyst]

Personally I don't believe the story. Firstly, the Brexit campaign has never promised £350m a week for the NHS, they have incorrectly stated that the UK's net contribution is £350m a week and have promised large chunks of it at various times to the NHS, the farmers, UK industry, tax cuts, and deficit reduction but at no point in time have they offered the whole sum.

I don't think they're said it directly as a policy statement, but certainly individuals have said things along the lines of, "That's money we could be spending on the NHS" without any further qualification. Certainly it's rare to hear them saying, "we could be spending it on X, Y, or Z."

The biggest problem, though, if that while it sounds like a lot of money to many people, it's absolutely dwarfed by actual government spending, even in specific areas like the NHS. Brexiters have pushed the line that certain services are suffering because we send a certain amount of money to the EU (ignoring the reverse benefits), and they get away with it because most people don't know what's already spend on those same services.