Brexit 23rd June..?

[BobbyZ]

I'm 99% sure I'm not going to vote. Realistically I don't think the result will make much difference (if we leave we'll probably secure similar arrangements to what we currently have), and the campaigns on both sides have been laughable. I have a feeling that we'll be staying in anyway.

[Adrian@TORQEN]

http://www.thenational.scot/news/ukip-leave-poster-accidentally-mimics-nazi-propaganda.18868

 

Really?

[BobbyZ]

http://www.thenation...ropaganda.18868

 

Really?

 

[GappySmeg]

if we leave we'll probably secure similar arrangements to what we currently have

 

That's the point... almost every single independant observer says we haven't got a cat in hells chance of getting similar trade agreements!

 

the campaigns on both sides have been laughable.

 

Damn right... I think we've embarrassed ourselves in front of the whole world!

[rtbiscuit]

im still undecided cant help but see everyone trying to push people either way has a personal agenda which i guess makes sense but im still cynical. but between the two im leaning towards remain

 

Well if it helps sway you, think of this: leaving is a one-way street, there is no coming back (not on anytime soon at least, and not on anywhere near the terms we enjoy now)... so choose to leave, and we cannot change our mind. Whereas choose to stay, and we have the luxury of changing our mind in the future if the EU fails to reform.

 

see you basically hit on the head the only thing im taking from both sides, better the devil you know.

"the immense central strength of the Remain case, which is ‘better the devil you know’.

What a powerful piece of advice (I would say) is that! How eloquently it whispers to our fears. How subtly it inflames our insecurities. How cruelly it plays upon our lack of self-esteem. How many great enterprises have been thought better of, how many brave journeys have never been started, amid a swelling murmur of ‘better the devil you know’.

Someone should have warned Christopher Columbus ‘Better the devil you know’. Instead some reckless fool ventured the thought that in order to discover a new continent you must be prepared to lose sight of the old one. How could Francis Drake feel so hopeful that he could circumnavigate the globe? If Captain Cook had stuck with the devil he knew, he could have enjoyed a prosperous career in the merchant navy.

Someone should have advised that ambitious young politician Abraham Lincoln to stick with the southern devil he knew. Couldn’t Emmeline Pankhurst see that giving women the vote was a leap in the dark? ‘Better the devil you know’ was precisely the argument of the Tory wets against Margaret Thatcher’s plans to turn and face her country’s decline.

Steam trains, flying, space travel, empire… every great leap in human history has been by definition into the unknown. And every one has been launched amid a susurration of whispers about the incontestable security of sticking with the devils we knew. Almost every hero we’ve ever had, almost every big, good thing we’ve ever achieved, has first had to brush away a swarm of reasonable doubts, and embrace the unknowable."

Extract Taken from this article

http://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/how-leave-can-win-or-at-least-lose-with-honour/

[RS8055]

This referendum is even more of a farce than the Scottish independence referendum turned out to be!!

 

Don't get me wrong though, I was more than happy to support the Scottish people with whatever decision they chose in that one... I think that the only reason it swung in favour of staying in the UK was because Alex Salmond didn't provide enough concrete facts about what would happen should independence be achieved.

 

In this instance, it's just simple scaremongering from both sides. Absolute joke.

[BobbyZ]

That's the point... almost every single independant observer says we haven't got a cat in hells chance of getting similar trade agreements!

 

I don't think I've read that. There's certainly been plenty of speculation about what kind of trade deals we'd get. The most likely outcome seems to be something like Norway, which basically means free trade but have to abide by the rules of the EU, so like I said nothing much would change. It wouldn't make sense for the EU to refuse any kind of trade deal.

[Adrian@TORQEN]

Talking about scaremongering...

 

"New flyer through the door from Brexit campaign. Thought I'd look into this claim. The Rio-Antirrio bridge cost 630m euro, 47% funded by a loan from the European Investment Bank (source: the economist). The same bank is funding £280m for expansion of facilities at UCL, £700m funding for the Thames Tideway Tunnel, and £360m funding towards the smart meter roll out by British Gas. This is all part of £16b investment in British projects over the last 3 years (crossrail, Manchester metrolink etc.) (source: gov.uk, Wikipedia). Potholes annoy the hell out of me too, but this flyer is pure propaganda, the EIB funds projects in the UK just as well as other countries."

 

(from Facebook - Nick Roesen)

 

[Randy_Baton]

 

I don't think I've read that. There's certainly been plenty of speculation about what kind of trade deals we'd get. The most likely outcome seems to be something like Norway, which basically means free trade but have to abide by the rules of the EU, so like I said nothing much would change. It wouldn't make sense for the EU to refuse any kind of trade deal.

 

If we want to have access to the Free Market whilst being outside of the EU(like Norway) then we have to accept the EU's 4 freedoms - Which include people (i.e. imigration), goods, services and capital. So access to the free market would mean no change to the imgration rules - which is a cornerstone of the leave campaign.

 

The EU's chief exutive has already stated the UK won't have access to the free market if it leaves. There is no appetite in Europe to make the transition easy as they don't want anyone else to leave.

Edited June 17, 2016 by Randy_Baton

[GappySmeg]

That's the point... almost every single independant observer says we haven't got a cat in hells chance of getting similar trade agreements!

 

I don't think I've read that. There's certainly been plenty of speculation about what kind of trade deals we'd get. The most likely outcome seems to be something like Norway, which basically means free trade but have to abide by the rules of the EU, so like I said nothing much would change. It wouldn't make sense for the EU to refuse any kind of trade deal.

 

As you say, we would be bound by pretty much the same constraints as now (assuming the EU would give us that deal!)...... but without any say WHATSOEVER on the future terms of those constraints. How anyone can think that is a good place to be, I do not know.

[BobbyZ]

I don't think I've read that. There's certainly been plenty of speculation about what kind of trade deals we'd get. The most likely outcome seems to be something like Norway, which basically means free trade but have to abide by the rules of the EU, so like I said nothing much would change. It wouldn't make sense for the EU to refuse any kind of trade deal.

 

If we want to have access to the Free Market whilst being outside of the EU(like Norway) then we have to accept the EU's 4 freedoms - Which include people (i.e. imigration), goods, services and capital. So access to the free market would mean no change to the imgration rules - which is a cornerstone of the leave campaign.

 

The EU's chief exutive has already stated the UK won't have access to the free market if it leaves. There is no appetite in Europe to make the transition easy as they don't want anyone else to leave.

 

Right, so like I said nothing would change. I don't believe the bit about not allowing free trade if we leave - that sounds like big talk to encourage us to stay. Some people talk about trade with the EU as if it's them doing us a favour. It's not - we get goods and they get money (or vice versa). It's mutually beneficial, and they would be shooting themselves in the foot by not allowing a trade agreement.

[coldel]

Yes fair enough got that wrong on immigration counts...got a little carried away arguing all the points, of which I think many are very valid.

Edited June 17, 2016 by coldel

[Sargara]

Right, so like I said nothing would change. I don't believe the bit about not allowing free trade if we leave - that sounds like big talk to encourage us to stay. Some people talk about trade with the EU as if it's them doing us a favour. It's not - we get goods and they get money (or vice versa). It's mutually beneficial, and they would be shooting themselves in the foot by not allowing a trade agreement.

 

We buy more from the EU than we sell to them, its in their interest to maintain the status quo.

https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/OverseasTradeStatistics/Pages/OTS.aspx

 

Our top export market isnt even in the EU, its America who we dont even have a trade deal with:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/24/trade-deals-are-red-herrings-in-the-eu-debate/

[coldel]

That's the point... almost every single independant observer says we haven't got a cat in hells chance of getting similar trade agreements!

 

I don't think I've read that. There's certainly been plenty of speculation about what kind of trade deals we'd get. The most likely outcome seems to be something like Norway, which basically means free trade but have to abide by the rules of the EU, so like I said nothing much would change. It wouldn't make sense for the EU to refuse any kind of trade deal.

 

If you read the planning document by the Leave campaign you can see them leaning on the Canadian model not the Norway one tariff free on some markets but not in other like Finance. Interestingly though is that they are 'advising' the government on what to do, in actual fact the government could do anything it wants to do in terms of a trade model. Given our locality to Europe (unlike Canada) it is very likely I would think that movement of people would be in it.

[Randy_Baton]

I don't think I've read that. There's certainly been plenty of speculation about what kind of trade deals we'd get. The most likely outcome seems to be something like Norway, which basically means free trade but have to abide by the rules of the EU, so like I said nothing much would change. It wouldn't make sense for the EU to refuse any kind of trade deal.

 

If we want to have access to the Free Market whilst being outside of the EU(like Norway) then we have to accept the EU's 4 freedoms - Which include people (i.e. imigration), goods, services and capital. So access to the free market would mean no change to the imgration rules - which is a cornerstone of the leave campaign.

 

The EU's chief exutive has already stated the UK won't have access to the free market if it leaves. There is no appetite in Europe to make the transition easy as they don't want anyone else to leave.

 

Right, so like I said nothing would change. I don't believe the bit about not allowing free trade if we leave - that sounds like big talk to encourage us to stay. Some people talk about trade with the EU as if it's them doing us a favour. It's not - we get goods and they get money (or vice versa). It's mutually beneficial, and they would be shooting themselves in the foot by not allowing a trade agreement.

 

Its not mutually benefical. the UK has alot more to loose, the Uk's trade with the EU compared to the UK's GDP is a lot more than the EU's trade with the UK when compared to the EU's GDP.

 

As I pointed out above the EU would not encourage a 'good deal' with the UK as it would encourage more contires to consider it. And if the UK left and still had access to the freemaket it would not have any say in the terms of the free market.

[coldel]

Right, so like I said nothing would change. I don't believe the bit about not allowing free trade if we leave - that sounds like big talk to encourage us to stay. Some people talk about trade with the EU as if it's them doing us a favour. It's not - we get goods and they get money (or vice versa). It's mutually beneficial, and they would be shooting themselves in the foot by not allowing a trade agreement.

 

We buy more from the EU than we sell to them, its in their interest to maintain the status quo.

https://www.uktradei.../Pages/OTS.aspx

 

Our top export market isnt even in the EU, its America who we dont even have a trade deal with:

http://www.telegraph...-the-eu-debate/

 

Although we buy more than we export to the EU, we are a much smaller as a percent. So from memory something like 45% of our exports go to the EU (around 15% to the US) but I have read it somewhere but its something like 15% of the EU export market is to the UK - we rely on them more than they rely on us.

[BobbyZ]

That's the point... almost every single independant observer says we haven't got a cat in hells chance of getting similar trade agreements!

 

I don't think I've read that. There's certainly been plenty of speculation about what kind of trade deals we'd get. The most likely outcome seems to be something like Norway, which basically means free trade but have to abide by the rules of the EU, so like I said nothing much would change. It wouldn't make sense for the EU to refuse any kind of trade deal.

 

If you read the planning document by the Leave campaign you can see them leaning on the Canadian model not the Norway one tariff free on some markets but not in other like Finance. Interestingly though is that they are 'advising' the government on what to do, in actual fact the government could do anything it wants to do in terms of a trade model. Given our locality to Europe (unlike Canada) it is very likely I would think that movement of people would be in it.

 

I think they refer to the Canadian model more because of the point that I made regarding the Norwegian one - that it's basically the same as what we have in terms of the compromises that have to be made, except that we wouldn't get to vote on EU legislation, so for the purposes of the campaign it doesn't make sense. Once all is said and done though, I would imagine the Norway model would be the most likely outcome.

[SmoggyPauly]

Firstly, congrats on actually reading my rantings! Quite an achievement in itself!

 

However, I never once said I believed the EU is less democratic than our current UK government. You are putting words into my mouth.

What I said was that most people who cast a vote in UK elections roughly know how our government works. Maybe not all the small details but a rough idea of how it works. Most even know their MP's name.

However, when it comes to the EU, unless you are an expert (which despite a lot of research I am most certainly not) it is really hard to understand exactly what it is you are voting for. What's more, very few people know who their MEP is, which to me demonstrates in itself a lack of engagement.

 

As I said in my Facebook post:

I've nothing against Europe, nor Europeans...quite the opposite. Europe is an amazing place steeped in history and built on loads of interesting cultures, developed by peoples from all over the globe.

My issue is directly with the organisation that is the EU, a bureaucratic spiders web of councils, commissions, parliaments, unions, bodies, organisations & agencies - all lead by a myriad of presidents, vice presidents, commissioners, MEPs, leaders, committees, members, lawyers, economists & many many other general bureaucrats!

It is so complicated and bureaucratic that it makes it impossible for the man on the street to effect anything

 

Sorry, but I don't personally think it is as simple as you are putting it.

 

As for the Uk government, well that's a separate issue altogether - one we'd likely agree on to be honest. I'm no fan of the Lords, or (most) politicians. It's also true to say the Tories are in with only 34% of the vote - although it was still more than any other party (not that it makes it right)

 

Hey I'm no raving Brexiteer to be honest - I simply put my thoughts down from genuine research I did from reliable sources and came to my conclusions. I'd like to see some European integration, but do not believe that the European union as we have it is the answer.

 

I'm also no fan of big government in general so that in itself goes against what I believe in.

 

Each to their own though - I'm horrified by the ridicule, lies and almost hatred from both sides. It seems to be much more aggressive than anything I've seen before...

 

SmoggyPaul,

 

Can you explain your reason for thinking the EU is less democratic than our current UK govt?

 

EU -

• European Council - 28 heads of state/governments (one for each country in the EU), all elected by the people of their home nations, most of which use proportional representation.
  
• European parliament - again, all MEPs are elected by constituents. Proportional representation again.
  
• European commission - not elected by the public, but are appointed by European parliament and the council of ministers.
  
• Council of Ministers - Ministers from each member state (elected as MEPs), also (with parliament) scrutinise the European commission.
  

The council sets the priorities to the commission, the commission proposes legislation and budget, parliament negotiates laws with the council of ministers to make EU law and budget. All done by people we have elected.

 

 

UK -

• House of Commons - 650 elected MPs, some of which are being investigated for possible election fraud, and a Tory govt in charge with 34% of the vote.
  
• House of Lords - 800+ UNELECTED people who claim £300 a day, just for showing up, and either make or break our laws.
  

[RickyZ]

That's the point... almost every single independant observer says we haven't got a cat in hells chance of getting similar trade agreements!

 

I don't think I've read that. There's certainly been plenty of speculation about what kind of trade deals we'd get. The most likely outcome seems to be something like Norway, which basically means free trade but have to abide by the rules of the EU, so like I said nothing much would change. It wouldn't make sense for the EU to refuse any kind of trade deal.

 

If you read the planning document by the Leave campaign you can see them leaning on the Canadian model not the Norway one tariff free on some markets but not in other like Finance. Interestingly though is that they are 'advising' the government on what to do, in actual fact the government could do anything it wants to do in terms of a trade model. Given our locality to Europe (unlike Canada) it is very likely I would think that movement of people would be in it.

 

I think they refer to the Canadian model more because of the point that I made regarding the Norwegian one - that it's basically the same as what we have in terms of the compromises that have to be made, except that we wouldn't get to vote on EU legislation, so for the purposes of the campaign it doesn't make sense. Once all is said and done though, I would imagine the Norway model would be the most likely outcome.

 

The problem is that Norway didn't join then choose to leave. As said above the EU will make it hard for us if we choose to leave because they don't want other countries to leave too. Can anyone make a good argument for leaving besides "it'll be fine" & "IMMIGRANTS!" because I haven't heard it yet?

[Juggalo]

Right, so like I said nothing would change. I don't believe the bit about not allowing free trade if we leave - that sounds like big talk to encourage us to stay. Some people talk about trade with the EU as if it's them doing us a favour. It's not - we get goods and they get money (or vice versa). It's mutually beneficial, and they would be shooting themselves in the foot by not allowing a trade agreement.

 

We buy more from the EU than we sell to them, its in their interest to maintain the status quo.

https://www.uktradei.../Pages/OTS.aspx

 

Our top export market isnt even in the EU, its America who we dont even have a trade deal with:

http://www.telegraph...-the-eu-debate/

 

Although we buy more than we export to the EU, we are a much smaller as a percent. So from memory something like 45% of our exports go to the EU (around 15% to the US) but I have read it somewhere but its something like 15% of the EU export market is to the UK - we rely on them more than they rely on us.

 

In 2000, 60% of exports went to other EU countries, but the percentage fell to 58% in 2005, 54% in 2010 and 47% in 2015.

Taking goods and services together, the share of exports going to the EU has fallen from 54% in 2000 to 44% in 2015.

The widening in the goods deficit was partly offset by a increase of £0.4bn in the UK’s surplus in services to £21.4bn

 

Europe is becoming less important to the UK as we trade more with the rest of the World. It makes sense to leave so we can develop our own trade deals.

This claim by Remain campaigners that our economy will suffer if we leave is bluster. The economy is already suffering ebcause we're in the EU.

 

Remain Argument: Being on the Titanic and shouting at people "Don't jump, or you'll drown!"

[SmoggyPauly]

I'm 99% sure I'm not going to vote. Realistically I don't think the result will make much difference (if we leave we'll probably secure similar arrangements to what we currently have), and the campaigns on both sides have been laughable. I have a feeling that we'll be staying in anyway.

Must admit BobbyZ, I have wondered if it will really make any difference to the general working man (or woman) - I also have my doubts!

[coldel]

It depends really on how the deals, markets etc react and what happens next. If we slip into a recession then it will affect everyone in the country for sure.

[rtbiscuit]

 

The problem is that Norway didn't join then choose to leave. As said above the EU will make it hard for us if we choose to leave because they don't want other countries to leave too. Can anyone make a good argument for leaving besides "it'll be fine" & "IMMIGRANTS!" because I haven't heard it yet?

 

Personally I believe the EU is a doomed entity if we stay or leave, with several countries in very bad financial shape and Greece being a financial problem that they keep pumping cash into is just delaying the inevitable. it wouldn't take a lot to destabilise the community which would require large financial sacrifices to keep it floating. It needs to become a United states of Europe in order to control and stabilise the entry of new weaker economies while keeping others financial afloat.

 

The primary beneficiaries are the original 5 who set it up with France and Germany at the top of the ladder.

 

Watching the apparent free movement being blocked by countries no longer wishing to take any more migrants, borders being reinstated and no real financial plan on how to fix it.

 

I believe (my own opinion) is that the EU will inevitably have to become more draconian and more dictatorial in order to force the states to go in the direction they want and to create a uniform system across all of the joined countries.

 

I think long term the EU is not something we'll want to be a part of and that in the short term voting to stay is basically a vote of acceptance for what ever they deem suitable in the future.

 

I'm under no illusion that financially and economically we'll take a big hit. but in the long term i think it will be less of a hit than what will come when it fails and we're in it.

[SmoggyPauly]

It depends really on how the deals, markets etc react and what happens next. If we slip into a recession then it will affect everyone in the country for sure.

Fair point...

 

I believe that the EU has recently agreed a tariff free trade deal with Vietnam - haven't looked into it in detail but might take a look at how a post EU deal could look. If they can strike one with Vietnam then why not us?

 

The free movement thing isnt a big issue for me to be honest - I don't think it's a big a problem as people make out it is! Bone idle layabouts that were born and bred here are just a big, if not bigger problem in my opinion! I would guess on the balance of things, most immigrants come to the UK wanting a job and to pay taxes, NI etc. - the lottery of where they took their first breathe is of little concern if they are decent human beings who want to contribute positively to society!

[coldel]

Yes the free movement issue isn't a big thing for me, but certainly for many a UKIP supporter it is the main reason to vote Leave.

 

Although we can point to varying models, we are unique in that we are not an outside country organising a deal with the EU, we are part of the EU leaving and wanting to renegotiate. Although there is no place for grudges in business, I would imagine there could be a bit of 'well you left, don't expect any favours from us' and as mentioned we export more to the EU than they export to us - we have to play our cards right (and I do not trust the current government enough to go in with enough balls to do it).