[Politics] Brexit

[Lincoln Imp]

Many small to medium companies are shackled with EU red tape despite the fact they don't actually do any direct trade with the EU. I can't find the link right now but I recently read an article that suggests 60% of these companies would be better off without this red tape thus freeing up funds to create more jobs.



Dump the red tape.



Because all companies have to comply with EU regulations regardless of them trading directly with other EU members or not.

Well I am sure we can all read articles that prove anything we want them to. ("I saw a piece in the Daily Express yesterday that...") Your implication that red tape would be hugely reduced if we left the EU is dealt with above, but regarding your "60%" reference above, you are not completely wrong - there is a 60% figure floating around. A survey last year suggested that 60 per cent of small company owners want to stay in the EU. It's probably not bang on accurate - not much is - but it's a long long way from claims that most small businesses want out. A more recent Yougov poll reported that small company owners wanted to remain, in a similar proportion to the general public.

 

[cunning fergus]

So it boils down to "I'm happy to accept expert opinion, but only when it agrees with me"?

It's not a single expert, or a single piece of analysis that I find convincing, but it is the weight of the whole. As I mentioned in an earlier post, where is the Brexit campaigners quantitative analysis that says that leaving will be better for the economy? They don't have any. That is revealing. It would be nigh on impossible for any economic modelling to show a positive economic from Brexit, and both sides know that.

I'm a broken record, but Brexit campaigners are picking the wrong argument trying to say that there won't be an economic cost to leaving the EU. They are plenty of reasons that Brexit is a good idea, but the economy is not one of them.

No, I said their view is relevant but it does not mean they are correct. I then provided some examples where other expert opinions/forecasts have been proved to be wrong.

That said I think the unequivocal acceptance by some people in this debate of what the "so called" experts are saying is unhealthy. It is a matter of fact those on either side will twist data to prove their points, that is how all political debates work.

There are plenty of experts on the leave side too, look up Digby Jones, Ruth Lea or Peter Hargreaves for example. They will see commercial opportunity for out just like Goldman Sachs see the same opportunity for in, ergo they are underwriting the in campaign.

The economic forecasts for staying in are beyond bombproof and they will not be factoring the kind of macro economic shocks that have arisen in the past. Resolving the underlying problems with the euro is a case in point, as will political instability caused by failing to deal with migration and expanding the EU to Syria.

You want to be in because you think the EU offers more economic stability than if we left. I think it's the opposite, because we are chaining ourselves to an institution that will ultimately fail in its current guise.

You have some assurance because experts frank your view, but, like the creation of the euro, they have been wrong before and they will be wrong again. Sorry to break that to you.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

No, I said their view is relevant but it does not mean they are correct. I then provided some examples where other expert opinions/forecasts have been proved to be wrong.

That said I think the unequivocal acceptance by some people in this debate of what the "so called" experts are saying is unhealthy. It is a matter of fact those on either side will twist data to prove their points, that is how all political debates work.

There are plenty of experts on the leave side too, look up Digby Jones, Ruth Lea or Peter Hargreaves for example. They will see commercial opportunity for out just like Goldman Sachs see the same opportunity for in, ergo they are underwriting the in campaign.

The economic forecasts for staying in are beyond bombproof and they will not be factoring the kind of macro economic shocks that have arisen in the past. Resolving the underlying problems with the euro is a case in point, as will political instability caused by failing to deal with migration and expanding the EU to Syria.

You want to be in because you think the EU offers more economic stability than if we left. I think it's the opposite, because we are chaining ourselves to an institution that will ultimately fail in its current guise.

You have some assurance because experts frank your view, but, like the creation of the euro, they have been wrong before and they will be wrong again. Sorry to break that to you.

You were doing so well until the very last sentence, when the temptation to patronise seemed to overwhelm you.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Well yes. You can no longer make/sell every widget the same way, you have to do some this way and some the other way. You're claiming this is better for your business?

Good point. It makes one wonder why all this "red tape" exists...obviously purely invented to hinder work.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

You were doing so well until the very last sentence, when the temptation to patronise seemed to overwhelm you.

And yet nobody has yet explained why the 'experts' are right this time when they were wrong about ERM and then the Euro. I look forward to some justification as to why they are right this time despite a poor track record.

 

[Captain Sensible]

Good point. It makes one wonder why all this "red tape" exists...obviously purely invented to hinder work.

One mans red tape is another mans security. It's almost as though the UK was free of red tape before the EU? It's not like the Brits to have red tape (whatever that is).

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

One mans red tape is another mans security. It's almost as though the UK was free of red tape before the EU? It's not like the Brits to have red tape (whatever that is).

Exactly.

 

[sten_super]

No, I said their view is relevant but it does not mean they are correct. I then provided some examples where other expert opinions/forecasts have been proved to be wrong.

I think we're talking in circles here. So there view is 'relevant' but can be disregarded because sometimes experts are wrong.

There are plenty of experts on the leave side too, look up Digby Jones, Ruth Lea or Peter Hargreaves for example. They will see commercial opportunity for out just like Goldman Sachs see the same opportunity for in, ergo they are underwriting the in campaign.

I don't share your cynicism. Sure, some agents have agendas (and some are more obvious than others). I don't think it's fair to then say that every senior person on either side of the debate is making the case purely due to self interest. For example, I think that can level that accusation at the Treasury modelling, or the 'evidence' produced by the CBI - but I don't see the obvious agenda held by Oxford Economics or LSE (both of whom undertook their own economic modelling which showed economic damage from Brexit). From reading the brief bios of the three Leave experts that you list, I can't see what Ruth Lea's angle would be, so am minded to think that she's making the case she is because it's what she believes, and because she wants the best outcome for the country. Perhaps that makes me naive (I suspect you think it does).

The economic forecasts for staying in are beyond bombproof and they will not be factoring the kind of macro economic shocks that have arisen in the past. Resolving the underlying problems with the euro is a case in point, as will political instability caused by failing to deal with migration and expanding the EU to Syria.

You want to be in because you think the EU offers more economic stability than if we left. I think it's the opposite, because we are chaining ourselves to an institution that will ultimately fail in its current guise.

Now we're getting somewhere. Increased exposure to the EU as a trading partner would clearly be a negative thing if there are further economic crises in the Eurozone. My response to that would be - why does staying in the EU mean we can't shift our export focus in the way suggested by Brexit campaigners? It seems to me (from an economic perspective) that Brexit is choosing to reduce our trade with the EU, on the off-chance that there's a crisis (which would probably have a broadly similar impact on trade to Brexit), rather than just expanding from our current EU-focussed exports market to a position (which is happening already) whereby we aim to export increasingly to other countries, to in effect diversify our export markets.

And yet nobody has yet explained why the 'experts' are right this time when they were wrong about ERM and then the Euro. I look forward to some justification as to why they are right this time despite a poor track record.

Which experts? Can you point me to the track record that states that every single 'expert' that is currently supporting the Remain position was also pro the Euro? Notably, Dave Ramsden, the Treasury Chief Economist, who led the Treasury work on the numbers produced yesterday, also led on the Treasury's analysis of the economics of joining the Euro, which opposed membership (and led to the establishment of Gordon Brown and Ed Ball's 'Golden Rules'). As I've said to [MENTION=12825]cunning fergus[/MENTION] previously, the idea that we should dismiss the opinions of a large body of experts just because some of them may have been on the wrong side of one decision historically doesn't wash with me.

 

[Lincoln Imp]

And yet nobody has yet explained why the 'experts' are right this time when they were wrong about ERM and then the Euro. I look forward to some justification as to why they are right this time despite a poor track record.

This again? Churchill got more than one thing wrong before 1939 - if this was 1940 would you have told him to bog off too?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

This again? Churchill got more than one thing wrong before 1939 - if this was 1940 would you have told him to bog off too?

Indeed he was wrong .... often. So I'll re-ask the question - why are the experts right this time ? Why should I believe them this time ? Why are they not wrong again ?

 

[DTES]

Indeed he was wrong .... often. So I'll re-ask the question - why are the experts right this time ? Why should I believe them this time ? Why are they not wrong again ?

Because, as far as I'm aware, no financial experts on either side of that old Euro debate are disagreeing with them.

I've seen plenty of people come out and say figures have been exaggerated - especially about those from the Treasury - but I haven't seen a single economic analysis that says Leave would actually be better for our economy than Remain. I haven't even seen one from anyone who was anti-Euro back in the day - and they weren't wrong back then.

Can you point to one?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Because, as far as I'm aware, no financial experts on either side of that old Euro debate are disagreeing with them.

I've seen plenty of people come out and say figures have been exaggerated - especially about those from the Treasury - but I haven't seen a single economic analysis that says Leave would actually be better for our economy than Remain. I haven't even seen one from anyone who was anti-Euro back in the day - and they weren't wrong back then.

Can you point to one?

I probably can't but as I've pointed out previously in the thread it's a chance I'm willing to take. I'm not going to vote in because of the risk to the economy .... I'm voting out for other reasons regardless of the economy.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Because, as far as I'm aware, no financial experts on either side of that old Euro debate are disagreeing with them.

I've seen plenty of people come out and say figures have been exaggerated - especially about those from the Treasury - but I haven't seen a single economic analysis that says Leave would actually be better for our economy than Remain. I haven't even seen one from anyone who was anti-Euro back in the day - and they weren't wrong back then.

Can you point to one?

Depends on what Scenarios you are looking at. There are some that predict a better outcome for our economy. http://openeurope.org.uk/intelligence/britain-and-the-eu/what-if-there-were-a-brexit/

I found that after 30 seconds of checking I expect others are available if you choose to look for them.

 

[DTES]

Depends on what Scenarios you are looking at. There are some that predict a better outcome for our economy. http://openeurope.org.uk/intelligence/britain-and-the-eu/what-if-there-were-a-brexit/

It predicts a better outcome for our economy than the Treasury does, for sure. It doesn't predict a better outcome for our economy if we Leave than if we Remain though. The actual quote is:

between a 0.8% permanent loss to GDP in 2030 and a 0.6% permanent gain in GDP in 2030, in scenarios where Britain mixes policy approaches

So, yes, there is one think tank that suggests it will broadly make no difference either way by 2030 (the mid-range of 0.1% loss is clearly so small it's irrelevant). It doesn't really cancel out all the pro-Remain analyses...

 

[JC Footy Genius]

It predicts a better outcome for our economy than the Treasury does, for sure. It doesn't predict a better outcome for our economy if we Leave than if we Remain though. The actual quote is:



So, yes, there is one think tank that suggests it will broadly make no difference either way by 2030 (the mid-range of 0.1% loss is clearly so small it's irrelevant). It doesn't really cancel out all the pro-Remain analyses...

It predicts a better outcome for our economy in two of the four Scenarios.

...a 0.6% permanent gain in GDP in 2030 – where it pursues free trade with the rest of the world and deregulation, in addition to an EU FTA.

.... where the UK strikes a FTA with the EU, pursues very ambitious deregulation of its economy and opens up almost fully to trade with the rest of the world, Open Europe estimates that UK GDP would be 1.6% higher in 2030 than if it had stayed within the EU.

How many more would cancel out all the remain guesswork?

 

[Irish_Seagull]

if the referendum could genuinly make a difference to the cause i very much doubt it would have ever have been premitted.

with the majority of brits these days being so brainwashed and extremist in thought it would be unthinkable that they would even consider the idea of questioning the masses of propaganda that bombards them.

to think a small country that once ruled the world is being bullied by a bunch of bankers and a small select group of unknowns and un elected rats is almost laughable.

what type of fool would declare that his nation need answer to an unelected buerocrat in order to survive...

i would question any article predicting the outcome of any uk economy post independance.

 

[GT49er]

Depends on what Scenarios you are looking at. There are some that predict a better outcome for our economy. http://openeurope.org.uk/intelligence/britain-and-the-eu/what-if-there-were-a-brexit/

I found that after 30 seconds of checking I expect others are available if you choose to look for them.

Aye, and there's the rub!

 

[Irish_Seagull]

You were doing so well until the very last sentence, when the temptation to patronise seemed to overwhelm you.

some people should just not post in these types of discussions

 

[Deleted member 22389]

The fact remains, we have open borders with the EU, any thoughts of reducing migration through some sort of reform is a pipe dream. What with Turkey eventually joining, Ukraine, a host of other countries, plus all the economic migrants / refugees arriving in the EU daily, who will eventually obtain EU citizenship Northern parts of Europe are going to be swamped with people. You can put forward all the economic arguments you like in favour for Remain, but in respect of immigration there is no other answer but to Leave.

 

[DTES]

It predicts a better outcome for our economy in two of the four Scenarios.

...a 0.6% permanent gain in GDP in 2030 – where it pursues free trade with the rest of the world and deregulation, in addition to an EU FTA.

.... where the UK strikes a FTA with the EU, pursues very ambitious deregulation of its economy and opens up almost fully to trade with the rest of the world, Open Europe estimates that UK GDP would be 1.6% higher in 2030 than if it had stayed within the EU.

How many more would cancel out all the remain guesswork?

Selective quoting there. The bit where you write "...." actually says:

In a best case scenario...

This is right alongside

In a worst case scenario, where the UK fails to strike a trade deal with the rest of the EU and does not pursue a free trade agenda, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) would be 2.2% lower than if the UK had remained inside the EU.

Best case +1.6%; worst case -2.2%. Expected range -0.8% to 0.6%:



That hardly endorses Leave, and I don't think it cancels out any of the analyses that support Remain.