The ultimate REFERENDUM thread

[Buzzer]

Yes thanks for that. This is well known. Around half of all our trade.

And it's not all going to disappear overnight. I remember predictions from 'experts' of irreparable damage to our trade by not joining the Euro - and a lot of the same people are major players in the Remain campaign and making similar predictions if we go Brexit.

I think we'll be fine. I've even got expert predictions to prove that!

 

[Buzzer]

This is the problem most think the EU is just about straight Bananas and Vacuum cleaners.

Please. You're better than this.

 

[Captain Sensible]

you can vote our lot out though cant you if you dont like them

You vote for your MEP's, the problem for most seems to be that there are MEP's from all member states and it doesn't always go the way you want. But we have the same issue with parliament. They make the laws, make the rules and you may have voted for the ruling party or not. The problem with the perception that the EU is undemocratic, is that your influence is diluted. But then we voted for those that voted to allow that to happen. If you follow me, not sure I follow me there. Again, is that worth economic disaster? We haven't even left yet. The £ is 15% down on the Euro in 6 months.

 

[Maldini]

If Cameron was as committed to the EU as he makes out he would have pushed for us to take on the Euro.If none of this is about our national identity then why do we keep the pound despite the headache it causes for companies in the UK to deal with europe and vice versa.They either want to deal with Europe fully or they don't.As if keeping a lousy pound is going to keep our identity whilst at the same time the EU swallows us up.

 

[Captain Sensible]

Please. You're better than this.

That's what you are alluding to though, that we need to 'take back' our laws, rules and regulations. For what? What will you personally gain from the UK government maybe overturning a law you might not like, but someone else might?
You said this whole debate is too much about the economy. Well I'm saying it's ALL about the economy!

 

[Captain Sensible]

And it's not all going to disappear overnight. I remember predictions from 'experts' of irreparable damage to our trade by not joining the Euro - and a lot of the same people are major players in the Remain campaign and making similar predictions if we go Brexit.

I think we'll be fine. I've even got expert predictions to prove that!

A large proportion of Services exports will disappear 2years and 1 day after a Brexit. Again it's all about Risk v Reward. The Risk is higher than the reward. I've not heard one single policy from the Brexit campaign about how they will tackle the economy after a Brexit, apart from saying that we are SO big, that the EU need us and it will be alright on the night.

 

[5ways]

That's what you are alluding to though, that we need to 'take back' our laws, rules and regulations. For what? What will you personally gain from the UK government maybe overturning a law you might not like, but someone else might?
You said this whole debate is too much about the economy. Well I'm saying it's ALL about the economy!

If you make it about the economy that is 'scaremongering' - well yeah the economic consequences should scare anyone who A. uses the pound B. works in Europe C. Has business in Europe D. works for a multinational E. does business globally or F. has shares in UK or European businesses or G. has a vested interest in the economic stability of the UK.

This seems to cover most people, so best to try and stick to the emotive stuff; sovereignty, borders, bureaucratic overlords etc.

 

[Buzzer]

That's what you are alluding to though

I'm not alluding to that at all. You're making all sorts of silly straw man arguments now.

 

[Captain Sensible]

If you make it about the economy that is 'scaremongering' - well yeah the economic consequences should scare anyone who A. uses the pound B. works in Europe C. Has business in Europe D. works for a multinational E. does business globally or F. has shares in UK or European businesses or G. has a vested interest in the economic stability of the UK.

This seems to cover most people, so best to try and stick to the emotive stuff; sovereignty, borders, bureaucratic overlords etc.

Well summed up those issues sadly seem to be what a lot of people are interested in instead of the big dark economic days after leaving. I think I'll leave it there then 5ways. The economy effects us all, and can hit us harder than a Polish Plumber with a wrench.

 

[sten_super]

Ask 10 top economist's and they will all have their own opinion so who's right and who's wrong.It's purey all guess work.

I understand and respect your reasons for voting out. However I have to pull you up on this, because it's not correct. As a professional economist I don't know a single colleague who thinks we wouldn't be worse off if we left the EU. In the FT survey of 100 top economists in December 2015, 76 thought that the UK would be worse off in the medium term, 18 said no difference and 8 said we'd be better off. It's not complete consensus but for a notoriously divided profession it's not bad.

More generally, quite a few people here have highlighted the fact that really being pro or anti Brexit really boils down to personal priorities - some are concerned more with economic impacts, others with improving sovereignty, accountability, etc. and this is how we each reach our own (generally logical) position on the referendum. Tim Harford's just done a very timely article on this very subject - we all think our own position is rational, and that we are being objective, but our positions typically just demonstrate our own biases.

 

[Captain Sensible]

I'm not alluding to that at all. You're making all sorts of silly straw man arguments now.

Really?
In Reply to Maldini: (the debate is too much about the economy)

I agree entirely. For me it's taking back control of our laws and no longer contributing to an institutionally corrupt, undemocratic bureaucracy that is entirely self-serving and immune to reform.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

nope they wont ditch that principle as it wont apply if the UK is not a member, so I wont confirm your straw man argument. They will free trade like Norway and other existing international trade rules.

In fact thats a really stupid post about some really basic stuff that you should know if posting in this thread.

You may be confused. The issue was whether the EU would insist on retaining free movement as part of any deal to give the UK continued access to the single market. You replied, with pleasing brevity, "they won't" and it was that claim I was simply asking you to confirm. If my question appeared 'stupid' it was because it was querying a daft claim. Yours. You now move things on by saying that the principles of free movement won't apply if we are not a member - we will "free trade like Norway". Unfortunate example. Norway's trading agreement with the EU includes the free movement you say will not apply if we are not a member. Ask Oslo. Best not to rattle on about stupid posts I'd say.

 

[Buzzer]

Really?
In Reply to Maldini:

So where did I mention straight bananas and vacuum cleaners? That is some logical leap to go from a general 'taking back control of our laws' to straight bananas. No offence but I think it's all getting a bit surreal.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

If you make it about the economy that is 'scaremongering' - well yeah the economic consequences should scare anyone who A. uses the pound B. works in Europe C. Has business in Europe D. works for a multinational E. does business globally or F. has shares in UK or European businesses or G. has a vested interest in the economic stability of the UK.

This seems to cover most people, so best to try and stick to the emotive stuff; sovereignty, borders, bureaucratic overlords etc.

If you make it about the economy and present opinions or predictions based on unknowable variables as hard facts it is scaremongering. Doesn't stop you (and others) doing it though.

 

[Captain Sensible]

You may be confused. The issue was whether the EU would insist on retaining free movement as part of any deal to give the UK continued access to the single market. You replied, with pleasing brevity, "they won't" and it was that claim I was simply asking you to confirm. If my question appeared 'stupid' it was because it was querying a daft claim. Yours. You now move things on by saying that the principles of free movement won't apply if we are not a member - we will "free trade like Norway". Unfortunate example. Norway's trading agreement with the EU includes the free movement you say will not apply if we are not a member. Ask Oslo. Best not to rattle on about stupid posts I'd say.

This.
So many think that the EU need us so badly, we will get a 'No Strings Deal'. Which we won't. As you say, no.1 on the list will be free movement. Norway also contributes almost as much to the EU per head than the UK, yet they get no benefits of being a member. The price they are prepared to pay for free trade.

 

[Captain Sensible]

So where did I mention straight bananas and vacuum cleaners? That is some logical leap to go from a general 'taking back control of our laws' to straight bananas. No offence but I think it's all getting a bit surreal.

There are some EU laws and regulations that are just plain stupid and I just highlighted 2 of the daft ones. I didn't mean to say they were important to you. I did ask, what law you are hoping the UK government will overturn to make your life easier and is worth risking the economic hardships post Brexit.
No doubt there are some that would be better overturned but I asked 'worth risking'.
One persons red tape is another's protection.

 

[Mellotron]

you can vote our lot out though cant you if you dont like them

They're making it difficult to. Also, only 23% of the population actually voted for them. So, it's actually quite tricky.

 

[5ways]

If you make it about the economy and present opinions or predictions based on unknowable variables as hard facts it is scaremongering. Doesn't stop you (and others) doing it though.

Reread what Sten_Super said

"I understand and respect your reasons for voting out. However I have to pull you up on this, because it's not correct. As a professional economist I don't know a single colleague who thinks we wouldn't be worse off if we left the EU. In the FT survey of 100 top economists in December 2015, 76 thought that the UK would be worse off in the medium term, 18 said no difference and 8 said we'd be better off. It's not complete consensus but for a notoriously divided profession it's not bad."

I can't tell you Burnley will get promoted, but they probably will. We have to operate with incomplete information but when you take what information is available to you and it all points towards the same conclusion that is a good basis on which to make decisions. You can't simply ignore what the evidence suggests will happen. Can you really ignore what 76 out of 100 top economists are telling you simply because you don't personally agree with it? If the shoe were on the other foot I would hope I'd be able to check my own biases.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

This.
1.)So many think that the EU need us so badly, we will get a 'No Strings Deal'. Which we won't. 2.)As you say, no.1 on the list will be free movement.3.) Norway also contributes almost as much to the EU per head than the UK, yet they get no benefits of being a member. The price they are prepared to pay for free trade.

1.) I don't know anyone that thinks that or has suggested that is the case.

2.) How do you know this? Free movement more important than a mutually beneficial trade deal?

3.) We are not Norway.

Bonus question why would our deal not be more like the Canadian example where they negotiated increased access to the single market and removed 99% of tariffs with no free movement of people stipulation?

 

[Maldini]

I understand and respect your reasons for voting out. However I have to pull you up on this, because it's not correct. As a professional economist I don't know a single colleague who thinks we wouldn't be worse off if we left the EU. In the FT survey of 100 top economists in December 2015, 76 thought that the UK would be worse off in the medium term, 18 said no difference and 8 said we'd be better off. It's not complete consensus but for a notoriously divided profession it's not bad.

More generally, quite a few people here have highlighted the fact that really being pro or anti Brexit really boils down to personal priorities - some are concerned more with economic impacts, others with improving sovereignty, accountability, etc. and this is how we each reach our own (generally logical) position on the referendum. Tim Harford's just done a very timely article on this very subject - we all think our own position is rational, and that we are being objective, but our positions typically just demonstrate our own biases.

76 out of 100 is a good number but it doesn't mean they would be proved correct if we left.How does it break down anyway.Are they saying we would be worse off to start with then once new trade deals have been signed we will 'get back to normal' after,say,2 years.Would we be far worse off,a little worse off. Being better or worse off is quite a vague question however I accept with so many with the same viewpoint it looks in their favour however like I've said it's not all about the econonmy for me.

One thing I forgot to say earlier is regards the matter of new jobs being created due to our being in the EU.So how many have been created in say the last 5 years.Maybe 1 million?How many foreign workers have moved here in the last 5 years?Maybe 1 million.Will the new jobs created in the next 5 years also go to foreign workers.So my point obviously is even if we could prove EU membership creates jobs then what's the point of these new jobs if they are swallowed up by foreign workers.