[Politics] Brexit

[JC Footy Genius]

I was told off for quoting from the FT because one of their writers may have supported joining the Euro a decade ago.

And rightly so .... at least Martin Wolf can be credited with not advocating we join the Euro. Unfortunately in the First rebuttal he quotes the Center for European Reform which may possibly have a vested interest as it proclaims The Centre for European Reform is a think-tank devoted to making the European Union work better and strengthening its role in the world. ... hardly a neutral source.

Second rebuttal used analysis from the Centre for European Policy Studies who are apparently partly funded by the EU .... at this point I lost interest same old same old.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

Yep, all "mights and maybees" innit. If we hadn't been in Europe we may be better or worse off now. If we leave ......
I don't understand the threat that we would have to still allow freedom of labour between countries if we leave if we want to trade. If they want to sell their stuff to us, can't we create our own tariffs and conditions etc to counteract those that the impose? I think a lot of this is about their inability to exist without our market,and are scared s**tless.

I think the reason you don't understand the threat that we would have to allow free movement if we want to trade is that no such threat has ever been made. You are confusing basic trade - which will of course continue - with free access to the single market. It is the latter that will require free movement of people. 'Europe' will not budge on this - it has been fundamental to the project since the dawn.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I'm the Remain camps worst nightmare.I'm the untouchable Brexit voter.I couldn't care less about facts and figures,trade deals,blah blah blha.I want out.

I'm in a bad marriage and I just want to dump this b....and go live on my own and do my own thing like before.
Couldn't care less if I lose the house and struggle for cash because I know I'll be happy.
Goodbye EU.Can't say it's been real because it's been crap.

Good grief ..... I'm not in the remain camp in the slightest and yet a statement like that makes me shudder

 

[cunning fergus]

Getting a little hot under the collar are we

Hardly, it's entirely logical that those older generations who fought for an independent UK against the Germans, Italians, Bulgarians, Romanians and all the other millions of Europeans that were sympathetic with their aims would be more inclined to vote out.

When I grew up I had numerous relatives who had fought in the war and I am pretty certain they would be voting out if they were still alive, and that's not to discount the intentions that some had in the 70s when voting to join the EEC.

My cousin who was old enough to vote in 74, and was active in the campaign to join the EEC can tell a story about how he couldn't convince his Dad, who always told him that the EEC was the thin end of the wedge.

His Dad is dead, who served in the RN on arctic convoys by the way, and now he knows his Dad was right..........guess how he is voting this time?

Wisdom from experience, it's no surprise the young will repeat the mistakes of their forebears, it's like the song from the lion king isn't it?

 

[drew]

Sure, But then I live by the maxim that it's always better to have free speech so you can work out who the knob heads are.

These days there are too many pissy pant fannys' wanting to close down debate because they don't like or agree with what they hear, it's a very sad state of affairs.

Now that I agree with!

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

Good grief ..... I'm not in the remain camp in the slightest and yet a statement like that makes me shudder

True though,well the first line.......then it went a bit awry...

 

[5ways]

And rightly so .... at least Martin Wolf can be credited with not advocating we join the Euro. Unfortunately in the First rebuttal he quotes the Center for European Reform which may possibly have a vested interest as it proclaims The Centre for European Reform is a think-tank devoted to making the European Union work better and strengthening its role in the world. ... hardly a neutral source.

Second rebuttal used analysis from the Centre for European Policy Studies who are apparently partly funded by the EU .... at this point I lost interest same old same old.

It's easy to play a sort of institutional ad hominem but if you take the actual points you can't argue with them, just ignore them. When will the scales fall?

 

[5ways]

I'm the Remain camps worst nightmare.I'm the untouchable Brexit voter.I couldn't care less about facts and figures,trade deals,blah blah blha.I want out.

I'm in a bad marriage and I just want to dump this b....and go live on my own and do my own thing like before.
Couldn't care less if I lose the house and struggle for cash because I know I'll be happy.
Goodbye EU.Can't say it's been real because it's been crap.

/thread

 

[Jim in the West]

Hardly, it's entirely logical that those older generations who fought for an independent UK against the Germans, Italians, Bulgarians, Romanians and all the other millions of Europeans that were sympathetic with their aims would be more inclined to vote out.

When I grew up I had numerous relatives who had fought in the war and I am pretty certain they would be voting out if they were still alive, and that's not to discount the intentions that some had in the 70s when voting to join the EEC.

My cousin who was old enough to vote in 74, and was active in the campaign to join the EEC can tell a story about how he couldn't convince his Dad, who always told him that the EEC was the thin end of the wedge.

His Dad is dead, who served in the RN on arctic convoys by the way, and now he knows his Dad was right..........guess how he is voting this time?

Wisdom from experience, it's no surprise the young will repeat the mistakes of their forebears, it's like the song from the lion king isn't it?

One of the first aims of the EU was to ensure peace in Europe, post WW2. It's done a pretty good job so far. Somehow it's a little ironic that those who were exposed to the worst of WW2 are those who most want to leave. If the EU starts to break up as a consequence of a "Brexit", then the chances of war in Europe are surely greater. Thankfully the vast majority of the younger generation are a little more enlightened....they realise how much we have in common with the average German or Italian, and they don't hark back to the "glory days" of the Battle of Britain.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

It's easy to play a sort of institutional ad hominem but if you take the actual points you can't argue with them, just ignore them. When will the scales fall?

It's called critical thinking, being aware of possible bias and vested interests. I would encourage you to learn this useful skill as it may help to strengthen your arguments p) If the article had quoted numerous sources from different perspectives all arriving at roughly the same figures then fair enough but it just cherry picked absurdly pro EU/remain sources.

I could go through that entire post picking holes in it but what's the point .. few people care about truth and facts just perception and spin

 

[jakarta]

One of the first aims of the EU was to ensure peace in Europe, post WW2. It's done a pretty good job so far. Somehow it's a little ironic that those who were exposed to the worst of WW2 are those who most want to leave. If the EU starts to break up as a consequence of a "Brexit", then the chances of war in Europe are surely greater. Thankfully the vast majority of the younger generation are a little more enlightened....they realise how much we have in common with the average German or Italian, and they don't hark back to the "glory days" of the Battle of Britain.

NATO (i.e. the USA's Nuclear Arsenal) has kept the peace in Europe, not the clueless cockwombles in the EU.

 

[5ways]

It's called critical thinking, being aware of possible bias and vested interests. I would encourage you to learn this useful skill as it may help to strengthen your arguments p) If the article had quoted numerous sources from different perspectives all arriving at roughly the same figures then fair enough but it just cherry picked absurdly pro EU/remain sources.

I could go through that entire post picking holes in it but what's the point .. few people care about truth and facts just perception and spin

It seems to me when presented with hard evidence and good analysis the first option is to attack the organisation which has presented it to you. Are they all wrong all the time? Is there any counter-evidence?

This image for one, is damning :

this looks like numerous sources with different perspectives - all negative.

It's opinion but high quality and informed. Are there any respected economic experts who would disagree with what he says? Surely the Out team would have produced them if they had.

There are great points that have come up repeatedly on this thread:

Fifth, the UK should leave because the EU is slow-growing. It is plausible that the UK’s trade with the rest of the world will expand relative to trade with its slow-growing neighbours. But reducing access to EU markets deliberately would make sense only if membership prevented the UK from trading with the rest of the world. Germany’s export performance demonstrates that it does not.

Sixth, membership of the EU prevents the UK from opening up world markets. Yet the EU was a moving force in three successful global trade negotiations: the Kennedy, Tokyo and Uruguay rounds. It has increasingly turned towards preferential trade arrangements. The clout of the EU gives it far greater capacity to open up the markets of, say, China, India or the US than the UK could do on its own.

 

[Maldini]

I have you down as something far more simple

You haven't even reached the level of simple for me.You're still bacteria swimming around.

 

[Maldini]

Good grief ..... I'm not in the remain camp in the slightest and yet a statement like that makes me shudder

You shudder too easily.

 

[Maldini]

True though,well the first line.......then it went a bit awry...

Jesus is it so hard to understand something so simple?(I'm not talking about Herr T)

To make it simple.The EU is like a bad marriage.I want out and I couldn't care less what happens afterwards.Geddit.

 

[Maldini]

All you guys in the Remain camp talk about nothing but the economics.

If you bothered to take notice you will see that the biggest gripe the Brexit camp have is regards immigration.

 

[cunning fergus]

One of the first aims of the EU was to ensure peace in Europe, post WW2. It's done a pretty good job so far. Somehow it's a little ironic that those who were exposed to the worst of WW2 are those who most want to leave. If the EU starts to break up as a consequence of a "Brexit", then the chances of war in Europe are surely greater. Thankfully the vast majority of the younger generation are a little more enlightened....they realise how much we have in common with the average German or Italian, and they don't hark back to the "glory days" of the Battle of Britain.

Jim, I think the key of the coal and steel community was to ensure Germany could not re-arm as it had after WW1 but to congratulate the EU for peace is disingenuous as the only war likely in Europe post WW2 was with Russia and that was an entirely NATO domain.

If you think an entirely legitimate democratic vote to leave would increase the chances of war in Europe, who do you see as the aggressors, and why?

On the other hand, I think the EU is as likely to cause conflict with Russia if it continues with its policy of ever increasing expansionism. The inclusion of Turkey in the EU is one example, plus the EU has fomented revolution in Ukraine resulting in the conflict and resultant thousands of deaths. Not a great track record already.

Sure I think the war is less relevant for younger generations, as you would expect, however that doesn't mean the older generations outlook is wrong it's just different.

It's an irony that many of the young in Europe are the cohort being systematically failed by the EU with its rigid commitment to failing ideology. As long as they don't moan about the consequences of it then that's fine, I bet they won't though.......they don't seem to be as stoic as their forebears.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

It seems to me when presented with hard evidence and good analysis the first option is to attack the organisation which has presented it to you. Are they all wrong all the time? Is there any counter-evidence?

This image for one, is damning :

this looks like numerous sources with different perspectives - all negative.

It's opinion but high quality and informed. Are there any respected economic experts who would disagree with what he says? Surely the Out team would have produced them if they had.

There are great points that have come up repeatedly on this thread:

Fifth, the UK should leave because the EU is slow-growing. It is plausible that the UK’s trade with the rest of the world will expand relative to trade with its slow-growing neighbours. But reducing access to EU markets deliberately would make sense only if membership prevented the UK from trading with the rest of the world. Germany’s export performance demonstrates that it does not.

Sixth, membership of the EU prevents the UK from opening up world markets. Yet the EU was a moving force in three successful global trade negotiations: the Kennedy, Tokyo and Uruguay rounds. It has increasingly turned towards preferential trade arrangements. The clout of the EU gives it far greater capacity to open up the markets of, say, China, India or the US than the UK could do on its own.

Firstly it isn't hard evidence whatever that means secondly it's only good analysis because it supports your opinion.

https://woodfordfunds.com/economic-impact-brexit-report/

http://openeurope.org.uk/intelligence/britain-and-the-eu/what-if-there-were-a-brexit/

Why is the analysis about Brexit in the two links I provided wrong/incorrect or any more likely to be true than the reports you always cherry pick?

 

[beorhthelm]

It seems to me when presented with hard evidence and good analysis the first option is to attack the organisation which has presented it to you. Are they all wrong all the time? Is there any counter-evidence?

why should there be? leaving the EU isnt about economics, though some will cite the saving of the cost of the membership fee as cheap win, and some have produced detailed analysis of the cost of legislation and bureacracy. when they've done so, they say its difficult to be sure, to seperate out the exact costs. unlike those who want to be in the EU who can be so assured. end of the day the exit has been about immigration (unfortunatly) and sovereignty. UKIP you'd be forgiven for not knowing was orginally about the latter, founded in responce to the Maastrict treaty. in the end, if there is a financial cost it must be weighed against that long term strategy of a unified Europe, run from Brussles, to a set of foreign law and cultural standards. your graphics, i believe set on a projection of 2030, show worst case scenarios better than that the government crunched out to put people off, and even that is acceptable cost i believe set against the deeper non-financial cost. alas, the battle is being fought on the wrong field.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

All you guys in the Remain camp talk about nothing but the economics.

If you bothered to take notice you will see that the biggest gripe the Brexit camp have is regards immigration.

This was expected - the Brexit camp announced a couple of days ago that following an unfortunate week on the economy (culminating in Andrew Neil's request for Kate Hoey to name "any reputable independent study that shows us better off if we leave", to which she responded that she couldn't) they were going to switch to the subject of immigration.

Oh, and the health service. They've read that people like the NHS so by Monday Gove was claiming that staying in the EU would wreck it. Boris has already done "Gay people should vote to leave". IDS seems to have covered "staying in the EU means that you're more likely to get decapitated". The next target could well be dog-lovers.