***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 23 *****
==============================================================
On-going Debate.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 20 Jun 16 at 01:34
|
What I am fed up of hearing is we want facts and figures.How many facts do people want?
Geldof is more genuine than Farge will ever be.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 16 Jun 16 at 10:38
|
I don't think so Dutchie.
What are his political credentials?
Past experience?
Organising Band Aid and pleading with poorer people than all those who performed to give money while making no financial donation himself does not make him an authority on politics.
Too many singers and actors these days think it's cool to pass their opinion publicly on political matters and urge us all to follow them.
Really surprised at you, with your fishing background, supporting someone who belittled fisherman trying to earn a living.
Ask the Cornish guys just how hard it is....
Pat
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 16 Jun 16 at 10:38
|
>>Really surprised at you, with your fishing background, supporting someone who belittled fisherman trying to earn a living.
So am I actually. Geldof FFS! ... got to be having a giraffe, Shirley.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 16 Jun 16 at 10:39
|
>>
>> Organising Band Aid and pleading with poorer people than all those who performed to give
>> money while making no financial donation himself does not make him an authority on politics.
>>
>> Too many singers and actors these days think it's cool to pass their opinion publicly
>> on political matters and urge us all to follow them.
Blimey, I am agreeing with Pat!
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 16 Jun 16 at 10:39
|
|
I think I'd be more interested in if he was right in what he said rather than worry about his past. was geldof correct in what he said?
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 16 Jun 16 at 10:39
|
|
See also Barack Obama, Mark Carney, Angela Merkel, Janet Yellen...
|
|
...in fact pretty well everyone except Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and the Islamic State.
|
>> I think I'd be more interested in if he was right in what he said
>> rather than worry about his past. was geldof correct in what he said?
>>
Yes.
|
Yes, Geldof was correct.
As is common with these things though, its a bit more complicated than he might have mentioned. And more than Farage admitted, for that matter.
The UK will still have to negotiate its fishing quota with the same countries, whether or not it is part of the EU. And it'll be the same politicians doing it. Individual Governments agree quotas are necessary.
All countries do not necessarily land their catch in the country they are from. e.g. more than half 1/2 of fish caught by UK boats is not landed in the UK. And half of that is landed in Norway. Equally other country boats may land their fish in the UK. 2/3 of the UK seafood industry is imported or landed by foreigner registered boats.
Fish/seafood is traded. In the case of the UK the majority of its exports go to the EU (2/3) and the majority of its imports come from China and Iceland (Non-EU countries).
The market is growing. UK Profit from the fishing industry was EU270m in 2013 and rose to EU370m in 2014. It is projected to continue to grow within the status quo. As ever, it is difficult to be sure what will happen if we leave the EU. Good or bad.
If we left the EU it would make little difference to who fishes where, since those agreements have been in place for many more years than the EU.
The primary criticism against the EU approach is one of governing efficiency and bureacracy.
And more; Country quotas can be traded. Country registered boats may be owned by companies from another country. etc. etc.
Consistent with everything else in this debate;
- it is not as straightforward as either side would have you believe. It is all reduced for effective headlines.
- The status quo is actually doing pretty well and improving. And, of course, is a known thing.
- nobody knows what will happen if we leave the EU. The Ins maintain it will be bad, the Outs maintain it will be good. The important thing is that it is unknown.
FWIW, I think the disruption will be much worse than any current restriction. The industry has been improving over the last few years, especially for the UK, change may alter that. Equally, it may not. But if I was a fisherman, I doubt I'd risk it.
They will still have to deal with big businesses owning their markets and their boats, country based quotas, long existing foreign fishing rights, financial pressures and international organisations. I'm not sure what they think will get better, its all just Daily Mail headline stuff.
Again, we are considering replacing a known situation with an unknown situation which may or may not be better. We wouldn't do it with a house, a car or a wife, but e think its fine with a country.
|
|
As normal one side presents the points that supports their arguement and skillfully ignores the ones that don't. Thanks for the post, it's seems it's a complex area.
|
>> Again, we are considering replacing a known situation with an unknown situation which may or may not be better.
Unknown does not imply worse. It can be a lot better as well. Often maintaining a status quo is the worst decision.
>> We wouldn't do it with a house, a car or a wife, but e think its fine with a country.
People do it all the time with houses and cars - sometimes with spouses as well :-)
Don't forget that UK is a net importer from EU. So, even if we leave, other countries will be willing to negotiate for their own interest!
Negotiation is a good option when you can leverage your advantage.
|
>>Unknown does not imply worse.
Of course not, it does not imply anything. It is unknown. However, the range of outcomes ranges from the very worse it could be to the very best it could be.
The majority of the Outs seem to focus on an outcome which is no worse and perhaps a little better. The majority of the Ins seem to focus on it being no better and perhaps a lot worse.
Truly, unknown and not a little worrying.
>>Don't forget that UK is a net importer from EU
This tiresome mantra needs addressing...
We are a net importer which means that our need for their products is greater than their need for ours. Financially getting the best rate on their products is more important than getting the best rate for ours.
Obviously we do not export to the EU, nor import from it; We trade with many countries some of which are within the EU.
In the beginning little will change as the trade continues, its not like ordinary people and businesses will suddenly start buying more or less. However, over a period of years if there is a small advantage to a company or business being within the EU, they will gradually drift away from us. If there is a small advantage to dealing within the EU then our trade will gradually diminish.
The Outs are relying on that change either not happening, or being balanced by some other change. Fair enough. What balancing change is that then?
Then you mention negotiation strength. Ok, so which country exports more to the UK than it does to rest of the EU countries? To which company is the UK a more important trading partner than the rest of the EU countries?
Of our exports, do more go to the EU or outside the EU? (its inside)
Of our imports, do more come from the EU or from outside the EU? (its inside)
So, never mind how important we are to the EU, how important is the EU to us?
Which country is it that will find its trading relationship with the UK so valuable that it outweighs normally negotiation behaviour.?
Well, the EU country that sends us the largest chunk of stuff is Germany, at 15% of our imports. Wow, so Germany will care, right? Well not that much. Because only 7% of Germany's exports come to the UK. They send 9% to France, and overall about 60% to the other EU countries.
So in truth, we are important to the EU as the EU is important to us. But we are not significantly important to any one country within the EU. Arguably then, we will get better trade deals while the EU exists, then if it doesn't, whether or not we are part of it, and our bestest deals will be as part of it.
Hoping for the demise of the EU as some do seems rather like turkeys wishing for Christmas.
Why, over time, would another country negotiate better, or even similar, for that matter, agreements than we have now?
Why do trade associations work? Why do unions work? Why do big associations and big unions work better than small ones?
We should consider what products/goods are traded. Because if our trade will be so improved, or damaged, by leaving the EU then best we know which industries it will happen in.
blah blah blah. You get the idea, or you don't.
It is certainly true that everything could work in our favour outside the EU. Not, in my opinion, likely, but certainly possible.
But I cannot see why we would change something known for something unknown when nobody can tell me how, when or why things will improve outside.
Because this doesn't seem to be a advantageous or disadvantageous, good or bad, discussion.
IN: Known, quantifiable, understandable
OUT: Unknown, not quantified, driven by emotion
|
>>Of our exports, do more go to the EU or outside the EU? (its inside)
>>
>>Of our imports, do more come from the EU or from outside the EU? (its inside)
The last figures I was involved with were 2014 and are what I used above.
Actually so far this year its pretty much 50:50 between EU and non-EU, import and export. Over the last 12 months it has varied; 47%/53% to 57%/43%
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 16 Jun 16 at 14:26
|
>> We are a net importer which means that our need for their products is greater than their need for ours.
Do we "need" German cars or just "want" those?
Does Germany "need" our money or they "want" it?
If Germany hikes car prices, then we'll buy more Japanese/Korean cars (more reliable, cheaper).
>> IN: Known, quantifiable, understandable
OUT: Unknown, not quantified, driven by emotion
Is it?
Immigration?
Home Office hasn't got a clue => unknown, non-quantifiable, non-understandable
In my opinion,
IN: serving the big businesses/elites/politicians, losing identities, driven by scaremongering, being told what to do, undemocratic
OUT: hope/excitement of improving things, democracy, freedom, being part of history etc.
The bottom line is that no body knows whether LEAVING is better/worse than REMAINING. That's why we have countless arguments everywhere.
Each one of us will vote based on our own understanding of the issues.
Sometimes there are no right or wrong answers for a question but just different consequences. Being in or out in EU is a similar situation. Some people will be better off outside EU and some will be worse of whatever be the outcome.
|
>> We are a net importer which means that our need for their products is greater than their >>need for ours.
>
>Do we "need" German cars or just "want" those?
>Does Germany "need" our money or they "want" it?
Make up your mind, is being a net importer important or not?
I simply do not care about immigration levels. There should be no benefits for recent immigrants and breaking the law should get you kicked out. But honest, law abiding workers? Who cares?
>>The bottom line is that no body knows whether LEAVING is better/worse than REMAINING
Agreed. That's why I said "Because this doesn't seem to be a advantageous or disadvantageous, good or bad, discussion".
However, the current situation is known. We are living it.
Unknown worries me. And being out of the EU is unknown. The only thing that would make me feel better about that would be some solid, fact based theories or proposals that I could feel comfortable with.
I haven't seen any. Have you?
|
I wouldn't mind so much that if the vote is for out our government will take car of us.
Cutting down on social services zero hrs contracts and many more nasty decisions didn't come from the E.U.
This so called freedom if the vote is out might be a high price to pay.Again just a opinion of me.
|
Unknown does not imply worse.
...but that's the way to bet. Would you hit your watch with a hammer on the off-chance of making it better?
|
If my watch wasn't telling me the time honestly, consistently and reliably then yes, I probably would.
The reason being it wouldn't make it any worse.
Pat
Last edited by: Pat on Thu 16 Jun 16 at 13:59
|
>>If my watch wasn't telling me the time honestly, consistently and reliably then yes, I probably would.
No possibility of making it better, the best you could achieve is that things would be no worse, but in fact you don't know what would happen, except that its difficult to see how it could be better..
I can certainly see the consistency in taking that path.
|
|
Then I hope you're not the one who trains your drivers in first aid.
|
Think yourself lucky you're not one of them WdeB. I always pick the most obnoxious, gobby one to get the others to practice the recovery position on:)
Pat
|
I did it with a car
And a wife
Just saying...
Not a house though
|
Seems I wasn't the only one who objected to the spectacular falsehoods in the Outie leaflet. The misused logos appeared in the section they had the nerve to call 'Mythbusters'.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-heads-of-unilever-airbus-and-ge-accuse-leave-campaign-of-using-their-names-for-a7084126.html
|
Switzerland withdraws longstanding application to join EU.
“This is a clear and historical message from the Swiss parliament to British voters. We wish you the best of luck for Brexit.
These days, Switzerland is called Britzerland because Swiss people support the Brexitâ€.
“Brexit will make this traditional friendship better and more successful than ever,â€
www.breitbart.com/london/2016/03/03/swiss-parliament-withdraws-bid-to-join-eu/
|
|
Well that's the triangular chocolate, cow-bell, and Nazi gold markets sorted out.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Thu 16 Jun 16 at 14:27
|
>> triangular chocolate
In my local supermarket they were selling metre long toblerone bars at the weekend. I just couldn't quite bring myself.......
Tempted though.
|
A thought-provoking post from a member of an expat forum I frequent:
"I'd favour Boris over Cameron after the nonsense Cameron has spouted of late. He has lost my respect and I really want to see him go. Don't underestimate Boris. Labelled a buffoon by the media he has played on this but underneath is a sharp intelligent mind who I believe could fulfil the PM role. Alternatively there is always Clarkson !!!!
UK farming had to change detrimentally under the EU. It was not a supply and demand issue. I see no reason why it cannot change back or be revised forward. To my mind to pay farmers not to grow food is one of the biggest failings of the EU. Many UK prices have been too artificially low for years. Perhaps a correction to this will be more beneficial particularly if it revises greedy supermarket policies. A review of quality might be in order too. It would be nice for a UK grown tomato to have a decent texture and flavour for once.
In any trading situation supply and demand forces need to be considered. As much as we may wish to buy EU food they need to sell it. Can the EU countries afford to have the loss of sales to the large UK population? This appears to me to be reason enough to continue trading as before. Many Remain supporters talk about the tariffs that will be applied. Why? Tariffs are not compulsory, they are a choice. I do believe some people believe they are compulsory and are under the illusion that being in the EU removes them. This, of course, is not the case.
The recent article on the BBC website with Germany talking about collapse of the EU if Britain exits is music to my ears. I believe this is the only way the EU can be revised from its current structure. It simply will not change organically as there are too many vested interests against change. A collapse and reformation could perhaps get it right in the form of a union to combine European countries for the good of the people and not the bureaucrats and MEPs".
|
>> Can the EU countries afford to have the loss of sales to the large UK population?
One relevant statistic given by Boris recently; 25% of German car sales are to the UK.
(Could you kindly cite the forum, Dog? I might find it useful.)
|
>> expat forum
Migrant forum.
|
"So, no, Nigel Farage isn’t responsible for Jo Cox’s murder. And nor is the Leave campaign. But they are responsible for the manner in which they have pressed their argument. They weren’t to know something like this was going to happen, of course, and they will be just as shocked and horrified by it as anyone else.
But, still. Look. When you encourage rage you cannot then feign surprise when people become enraged. You cannot turn around and say, ‘Mate, you weren’t supposed to take it so seriously. It’s just a game, just a ploy, a strategy for winning votes.’
When you shout BREAKING POINT over and over again, you don’t get to be surprised when someone breaks. When you present politics as a matter of life and death, as a question of national survival, don’t be surprised if someone takes you at your word. You didn’t make them do it, no, but you didn’t do much to stop it either.
Sometimes rhetoric has consequences. If you spend days, weeks, months, years telling people they are under threat, that their country has been stolen from them, that they have been betrayed and sold down the river, that their birthright has been pilfered, that their problem is they’re too slow to realise any of this is happening, that their problem is they’re not sufficiently mad as hell, then at some point, in some place, something or someone is going to snap. And then something terrible is going to happen."
From:
blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/a-day-of-infamy/
|
|
The writer of that blog is entitled to think that, I think it's totally garbage. no doubt told to write a piece on that as some sort of outrage piece. Little more than trolling really.
|
|
What specifically do you take issue with?
|
|
The whole tone of it is so far fetched, it's nonsense. Trying to link a political campaign in this country to motivating murders is so stupid, I'm surprised it needs explaining.
|
|
Why is it impossible that a political campaign could be linked (indirectly, as it seems is possible in this case) to a murder "in this country"?
|
The bloke is no doubt mentally ill. There's no way you can link the two. I said in this country because no doubt someone would try and link in what happened in another country during a vote of some sort.
You want to believe this trolling, knock yourself out. I'm surprised people are sucked in by it though.
|
Mentally ill maybe but I see no problem indirectly linking them if, indeed it was the element which triggered his mental illness to snap.
Your argument is similar those who try to say such things as the terrorist attacks in France last year were "nothing to do with Islam". Those blokes were probably just mentally ill, right?
|
|
No, they were misguided by people who'd made it their business to misguide them. The difference here is between intent and recklessness: those who use hate language in the context of the referendum campaign are reckless as to who might act on it - and how. It doesn't make them directly responsible but it should remind us that debate has limits.
|
|
Yes Will, I agree, but there would still be a link - indirect as I said in this case, if indeed the eyewitness accounts are true. One doesn't get to stir the pot and then shout "not me guv" when someone acts on your stirring - again, if indeed this turns out to be the case.
|
>>should remind us that debate has limits<<
As indeed this one should less than 24 hours since her death.
Surely it's a time to reflect upon just what her family are going through at the moment instead of trying to make her a scapegoat?
Pat
|
This will one will go round and round. You see a link, i think it's garbage.
I'll just leave it there.
|
>> Mentally ill maybe but I see no problem indirectly linking them if, indeed it was
>> the element which triggered his mental illness to snap.
>>
>>
Another astonishing own goal from the remain camp. I'm amazed at the ineptitude of people who think firing insults and slurs at those who disagree with them will somehow win people round, and using a murder to support their case, the reason for which is still unknown beyond wild speculation is a new low.
It wouldn't be so bad if the remain side hadn't peppered their arguments with ridiculous and unproveable "Facts" to bolster their arguments from day one.
|
That's precisely what's not happening, RR.
But if you want ridiculous and disprovable, try £350m, Airbus, General Electric, Turkey...
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Fri 17 Jun 16 at 10:37
|
|
I'm not insulting or slurring anyone, RR, nor using a murder to support any case, if you can't understand what I'm saying I can't really help that.
|
Sorry, these people are just pouring petrol on the fire.
That blog has already been watered down - here's an earlier version.
web.archive.org/web/20160616183957/http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/a-day-of-infamy/
|
|
I think the Massie article goes a little too far towards drawing a direct causative link. But he's quite right about the Outies' ugly anti-immigrant rhetoric. Forget yesterday's murder for a moment and ask if that 'Breaking Point' poster represents an attitude you're happy to be associated with.
|
Of course I don't approve of the poster, or of demonising / insulting the opposition in a serious political disagreement, which both sides have done to their utmost. That has been one of the most frustrating things about the whole process.
I'm sure I could write a reasonable sounding article linking yesterday's horror to Remain, ISIS or just about any other organisation although I might struggle with the WI.
He supposedly shouted "Britain First". So by all means impute possible blame to them.
goo.gl/6D86JN (Indy)
Britain First has denied involvement in the attack on Labour MP Jo Cox in Birstall, west Yorkshire – and the group's leader has said he would like to see the person who carried it out "strung up by the neck on the nearest lamp post."
Impossible to make that up. BF is I believe the current name for what was the National Front.
|
Hate is always a destructive emotion. It is out of place in any political, religious, sporting or any other situation.
It has infested politics and religion for far too long and infests parts of this forum and many other "debating" environments.
In all of these it is wrong and can and often will lead to some form of violence.
The equivalent of yesterday's shooting could have happened in many other political situations of the last few years, for example, the levels of hate in the Scottish referendum had to be seen to be believed.
It's not a new thing, look at the levels of hate that existed in many industrial disputes and political disputes of the 70s and 80s, and even beyond, it is still part of modern politics becoming more apparent at election times.
Yesterday showed what it can lead to, let's start by taking it out of this forum.
Rant over ...
|
|
I would go along with that.
|
I don't think you can blame the campaigners. I think their behaviour is ridiculous. In truth, probably so do they.
But if one is trying to win over chunks of the electorate and that sort of talk wins them over, what do you think will happen?
These people are trying to "win" a referendum. If sufficient of the audience was offended by their actions and refused to vote for them on that basis, then it would stop. Immediately.
But they don't.
And I see no way of stopping a politician using a particular tactic other than it losing them votes for their "side".
But a nutter is a nutter. If it wasn't this and now, then it would be something else and tomorrow. There may be a link, though I have my doubts, but there is no responsibility.
I also think stopping the campaigning for the afternoon was ridiculous grandstanding trying to attribute some higher standing or position for their own morality. Sadly, it probably worked..
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 17 Jun 16 at 11:39
|
We we are mixing topics here?
This thread is for EU debate and let's be focused on that.
There is a difference between coincident and correlation.
|
Latest analysis from the IMF is that exit would cost us a minimum of 1.4 percent of GDP (if we retain all the things the Outies say we won't, like Single Market membership) and more like 5 percent otherwise.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36561720
In return we gain back about £8bn a year of net contribution to the EU. So a 'technical recession' would be a small price to pay, would it?
UK GDP is about $3trn or £2.2trn pa. 1.4 percent of that is £30bn. And government receipts run at about 30 percent of GDP, so we stand to lose a minimum of £9bn. So the sweet old white lady still won't get a better-funded NHS (not that Michael Gove has any such intentions) and the adult population loses out by about £700 per head.
Under the model the Outies tell us they really want - no Single Market, no free movement - you can multiply all that by four.
We might return to growth by 2022, but by then we'd be hundreds of billions down on where we'd be if we'd stayed.
So will there be anything left to take control of?
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Sat 18 Jun 16 at 08:41
|
|
Quite a few people I know (on proper pensions) think that a 3 year recession is a cheap price to pay - all right I suppose as long as it's not your job/house etc that goes.
|
>> Quite a few people I know (on proper pensions) think that a 3 year recession
>> is a cheap price to pay - all right I suppose as long as it's
>> not your job/house etc that goes.
>>
The other side of the coin though, is............is it right that your decision making is solely based on your short term domestic circumstances.
Are you properly looking at the bigger picture?
|
Nothing in the IMF report suggests a UK outside the EU would ever perform better than if we remained. I've never heard that claim from an Outie either; the most they offer is that we'd make the best of a bad job by lashing up trade deals with Belarus and New Zealand and that somehow we might achieve parity with what we have today.
Of course, even if that happens we'll have missed out on six years of economic growth with no possibility of earning that money back. So the damage isn't short-term, it's permanent.
|
I don't think there's a huge amount of point in these types of reports. I bet most people have already made their mind up. Look on the other thread, how few people actually changed their minds.
I wonder how much difference the outcome will be if there hadn't been any campaigning at all?
|
>> The other side of the coin though, is............is it right that your decision making is
>> solely based on your short term domestic circumstances.
An unnecessary recession, with consequences similar to those of the banking crisis, affects everybody. Pretty much every reputable economic forecaster says that will be the consequence. They only differ on the scale. The dip in tax revenue dwarfs Brexit's fantasy figure for savings from our EU contributions never mind the real numbers. Faced with a dip that any Chancellor has two choices (a) borrow (b) cut services and increase taxes. Doing the first means following the path the Tories criticise Brown for taking. Osborne's targets kicked down the road again. So it's (b). Tories who say they'd vote down such a 'budget of probity' are guilty of breathtaking hypocrisy.
>> Are you properly looking at the bigger picture?
After all but six months of campaigning Out have no consistent or clear image of what the bigger picture might be.
|
>> An unnecessary recession, with consequences similar to those of the banking crisis, affects everybody. Pretty
>> much every reputable economic forecaster says that will be the consequence. They only differ on
>> the scale.
You seem unable to grasp the position here.
IF there is a recession and I'd agree that's a distinct possibility to start with... then to some people (quite a lot if you believe the polls) this is acceptable for the long term gains to be had in the various avenues already discussed to the nth degree here and elsewhere.
We have had recessions before and come back out of them perfectly well, there were no riots in the street, bodies on pavements, the NHS performed perfectly well, etc.
>> After all but six months of campaigning Out have no consistent or clear image of
>> what the bigger picture might be.
and neither does the 'in' campaign. All you can do is make an educated guess.
There is no reason whatsoever this country cannot make it on its own, as do many others across the world.
It is my belief that we will be better served in the long run by making our own decisions.
|
...unable to grasp the position...
Well, someone is, WP, and I don't think it's Bromp or me. You seem to be wilfully ignoring the economic basics. You think a recession is a price worth paying (not that you'll pay it yourself, as I've pointed out to you before) so that you can enjoy your post-immigration utopia.
Yes, of course there have been recessions before, but previously we've always done our best to avoid them and worked hard during them to mitigate the effects. Can you think of one (at least since Churchill's Gold Standard mistake in the 1920s) that we've willingly and avoidably brought brought on ourselves?
Even at the end of a recession, we are worse off than we would have been if it hadn't happened. My personal, post-tax income - despite continuous employment and a promotion - has only just recovered to more than its 2007 value and plenty are worse off than me. And you think we should go through that all over again so that we can 'take control'?
|
I do not take the IMF prediction as fact. Do so if you wish, and use it as evidence to support your own conclusion, but consider confirmation bias.
The five 11 or 12 minute More or Less "Referendum by Numbers" programmes broadcast during the week were broadcast this morning in two 30 minute chunks.
Worth any of us listening to IMO but it might reduce your confidence in all of the numbers that have been bandied about.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qshd/broadcasts/2016/06
|
|
If I were the EC, I would ensure the UK -if it leaves - pays an access fee to the single market as Norway does. And I reckon £5Bn will be the number..
|
>> If I were the EC, I would ensure the UK -if it leaves - pays
>> an access fee to the single market as Norway does. And I reckon £5Bn will
>> be the number..
>>
The latest stats I found say
"In April 2016 the value of exports (EU and Non-EU) increased to £25.0 billion, and imports (EU and Non-EU) increased to £41.0 billion, compared with last month. Consequently the UK is a net importer this month, with imports exceeding exports by £16.0 billion."
So the import:export ratio EU:UK is 8:5
So going by madf's reasoning, if the EU should/will charge UK £5bn for export access, UK can reasonably charge them £8bn; giving the UK a net gain of £3bn!
|
>> Well, someone is, WP, and I don't think it's Bromp or me. You seem to
>> be wilfully ignoring the economic basics. You think a recession is a price worth paying
>> (not that you'll pay it yourself, as I've pointed out to you before) so that
>> you can enjoy your post-immigration utopia.
You three seem to think that your opinion is the only one worth having.
I haven't 'wilfully ignored' anything. I've listened to what's what and then formed my opinion, but as it doesn't conform to your ideals, you belittle it and assume I am unable to grasp all the issues.
I DO think a recession of some sort is a price worth paying for economic and political freedom and that there's no reason why this country cannot deal with it.
Me not suffering the recession fully is a pointless argument, because I can easily bat it back and say there are plenty in your shoes who are only looking at their own selfish circumstances, not the country's bigger picture.
Immigration is not a main subject for why I voted 'out'.. sorry to disappoint... although I would prefer more secure borders and a points based system for immigration, like the Aussies.
|
After all this time, we don't seem to have got far beyond "my dad's bigger than your dad".
It has to be said that the rest of Europe isn't breaking any pots, with the exception of Germany.
I won't say the forecasts are worthless, but they will be wrong. If anybody knew how wrong of course, they could produce a proper forecast...but they don't and they can't. And of course we will never know by how much they were or weren't wrong because the EU and UK would diverge following a Brexit.
It's worth considering that none of the 'official' forecasters as far as I know has actually done two forecasts, Remain and Brexit, and compared them.
- What they have done is to estimate the effects of the changes that will, or are thought likely to as with sterling devaluation, directly result from leaving the EU with no assumptions as to how we can deal with that.
- Presumably no attempt has been made to look at possible EU crisis scenarios, thinking of Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy's problems related to the euro) and what those risks could do to the "difference" forecast.
When you are looking for an argument that supports Remain, it's very easy just to assume that in a Brexit, all that changes is that UK would no longer have club benefits. It's like assuming that a large company will not react to changes in its competitive environment.
Whatever the result, a lot of people will be disappointed, but we will just have to get on with it.
Worth remembering too that no country can be truly independent unless it wants a closed economy which has been tried, and has failed comprehensively. We will always have to give up some freedoms to get the concessions we want or need. And the 'market' in a very wide sense will dictate much of what happens - including with immigration. The UK needs immigrants to fix its demographic imbalance (although not as much as Germany does IIRC). Brexit will not enable UK to pull up the drawbridge.
I do however think that it is undesirable, if not actually dangerous, to assume it doesn't matter whether we are in or out.
Democracy should make revolutions redundant - after all, if the government is not widely accepted by the people, they can either vote for somebody else or put themselves up for election. Almost any form of government is OK when things are going well; it's when things are tough and people are suffering that democracy does its job of stabilising the state - the government can be changed. But what will happen if things get much worse in Spain for example? Will the electorate be content to chuck out their domestic government and change their MEPs, if they believe that the EU and the euro are the cause of their poverty?
We haven't noticed the democratic deficit yet because for the most part life has gone on and the plates have been kept spinning, at the eventual expense of later generations. The cans can't be kicked down the road forever.
If we do stay in, I hope we have politicians brave enough both here and in Europe generally, to take their heads out of the sand. Never mind taking back control - nobody is in control at present.
Last edited by: Manatee on Sat 18 Jun 16 at 19:43
|
There were three articles by left-wing authors in the Guardian last week, one which examined why Trump's appeal in the US and the other two examined the popularity of Brexit amongst traditional Labour voters.
The first one "‘Could he actually win?’ Dave Eggers at a Donald Trump rally" concluded that Trump was drawing support from all sections of American population and that his supporters did not really care what he said. "His supporters do not care. Nothing in Trump’s platform matters. There is no policy that matters. There is no promise that matters. There is no villain, no scapegoat, that matters. If, tomorrow, he said that Canadians, not Mexicans, were rapists and drug dealers, and the wall should be built on that border, no one would blink. His poll numbers would not waver. Because there are no positions and no statements that matter to them."
The second one "Brexit will hurt your city, Labour tells core voters – but no one's listening - John Harris" is also covered in a short video tiny.cc/5ksbcy worth watching.
The third one "Britain is in the midst of a working-class revolt -John Harris" the theme was that the working class voters were not convinced by any of the economic arguments put forward by Remain. For them there is only one concern - immigration.
"Labour MPs have come back from their constituencies, amazed by the views they encounter on the doorstep. In the inner-city Birmingham neighbourhood of Handsworth, I met Sikh shopkeepers who claimed that the country is full, with just as much oomph as anyone white; in Leominster, Herefordshire, there are plenty of Tory voters gleefully defying Cameron’s instructions, and fixating on questions of sovereignty and democracy.
But make no mistake: in an almost comical reflection of the sacred lefty belief that any worthwhile political movement will necessarily be built around the workers, the foundation of the Brexit coalition is what used to be called the proletariat, large swaths of which are as united as in any lefty fantasy, even if some of their loudest complaints are triggering no end of anxiety among bien-pensant types, and causing Labour a great deal of apprehension.
In Stoke, Merthyr, Birmingham, Manchester and even rural Shropshire, the same lines recurred: so unchanging that they threatened to turn into cliches, but all the more powerful because of their ubiquity."
|
>> There were three articles by left-wing authors in the Guardian last week, one which examined
>> why Trump's appeal in the US
I think the voters there have had enough of traditional politics and someone out of the mould appeals.... although if I were American, that would be a step too far for me. Hillary wouldn't do it either, so I'd have to abstain.
Over here, there's a bit of the same going on.
It wasn't that long ago that a couple were refused adoption because they were UKIP supporters FFS?
Fast forward to now and whilst there's still some who try to ridicule that viewpoint, most politicians have worked out that too many people (who vote) have great sympathy for some/a lot of what UKIP are about.... and you don't have to be a rabid BNP type to think like that, despite some of the mud thrown.
Nigel Farage has done this country a huge favour in that respect. It has allowed a re-think on some of the basics... something that the PC brigade tried to sit on.
|
I know many of you wouldn't stoop so low as to read the the the Daily Mail, but this article shows the serious issues which are entrenched in the European Union, adversely affecting millions of peoples lives throughout Europe.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3647600/We-told-EU-makes-stronger-haunting-dispatch-despairing-destitute-Greece-make-change-mind.html
|
Strangely enough, in the hotel where I am staying on Tenerife, there are three unrelated Indian Sikh families.
Now, like religion & politics, I steer well clear of discussing these things, even with my friends in the pub back at home. However, these families are very chatty with people on adjacent tables at breakfast, and sad to say I have eavesdropped on their conversations.
They are all voting for 'out'. I won't bore you with their reasons for voting this way, but each family is on holiday with three generations, and they seem quite eloquent business owners.
Not what I expected at all
|
I liked this:
tinyurl.com/jnggrcz
Jonathan Pie rant...if you don't like the odd swear word, don't listen.
|
BBC Radio 4's 'More or Less' programme analyses the various statistical claims made by the different parties during the referendum campaign. Sounds dull, but it isn't. It's in two parts each of 30 minutes on the iPlayer Radio.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qshd
|
More or Less is excellent and informative as always, although I'm not sure which of my convictions Manatee thinks it will shake, especially since I've used its findings here during the campaign to challenge some of the Outies' wilder wishful thinking.
Still with Manatee, of course the IMF report is forecast, not fact. But it's consistent with the economist consensus that exit would damage the UK economy, and gives us a range of numbers to put the Outies' claims about releasing money for 'our priorities' in context - a context in which they are plainly unachievable.
WP protests loudly but still hasn't addressed my challenge to his idea that an avoidable recession is no big deal.
And BB points to a significant issue raised in the John Harris articles: that working class people are treating the referendum as a protest vote against a relatively mild Conservative government, but in doing so they risk deposing it in favour of a much nastier one that will do them no favours at all. Meanwhile, the Labour Party, which ought to be pointing this out to them, is nowhere to be seen, which ought to frighten social progressives everywhere.
|
>> WP protests loudly but still hasn't addressed my challenge to his idea that an avoidable
>> recession is no big deal.
A recession may well be avoidable with an 'in' vote... but then we're lumbered with the rest of it.
I happen to think some sort of recession is worth it.. and is no big deal in the big scheme of things.
I don't have a problem with a difference of opinion... I do have a problem with people who think their way is the only way.
|
No big deal? Would you say that to the young people who left the education system during the last one and are still struggling to find appropriate jobs because there was nothing available when they came out and they're now being overtaken by people who've graduated since?
This is the point we're trying to get through to you: the recession itself would be temporary but recessions do lasting damage. Nor do they affect everyone equally, and your immunity does not give you a position of virtuous disinterest from which to decide the fate of others.
Recessions come along unavoidably from time to time, but to create one unnecessarily is hugely irresponsible.
|
Looking at the country as a whole... I think some short term pain is worth long term gain.
That is the point I am trying to get through to you.
|
|
We know, but what long-term gain? Show us the corresponding report from an international economic organisation that says the UK would perform better outside the EU. 'Much the same' - which the strongest offer from the Outie camp - isn't good enough if it's going to cost us six years of economic growth; we have to do better just to make that back.
|
>> We know, but what long-term gain? Show us the corresponding report from an international economic
>> organisation that says the UK would perform better outside the EU.
There isn't one... why keep asking for something that doesn't exist.
The 'gain' is not being financially linked to Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal, etc who have some horrendous money worries and without the collapse of the Euro is only going to get worse and need bailing out.
Then when the Euro does collapse, there will be financial turmoil.
Then there's the fluid border situation.. seen the unrest in Turkey? Turkey's heading for a fall with Islamic difficulties.
Syria's not sorted yet... do you remember the difficulties with economic and genuine migrants, that's not going away soon.
Bung in some dreadful bureaucracy and waste, if not financial fiddling...
Why not go our own way? There's no reason on this earth why we can't make a sensible fist of it...plenty of other countries do.
|
|
And how will being out protect us from an economic crisis in a major export market and in countries where our banks have huge investments? Neither will out isolate us from events in Turkey, Syria or elsewhere. While EU might pressure us to take refugees its doing what should be UN function. Would you exit that organisation too to enhance our independence?
|
...Greece, Spain, Portugal... Scare
...collapse of the euro... Scare
...financial turmoil... Scare
...Turkey... Scare
...Syria... Scare
...bureaucracy...waste...fiddling... Dog whistles, tabloid myths and exaggerations, mainly
Not much substance to any of those, really. As Bromp points out, to the extent that any of the scares comes about, it will affect the UK anyway - although the euro really should have collapsed already if what we heard two years ago was true.
As for 'making a sensible fist', we can get by, we almost certainly would. But getting by is not success. You yourself have admitted we'd gain nothing economically and suffer greatly in the short and medium term. All to hide from some events that may never happen and others that will affect us whether we are in or out. How does that make sense?
|
>> ...Greece, Spain, Portugal... Scare
>>
>> ...collapse of the euro... Scare
>>
>> ...financial turmoil... Scare
>>
>> ...Turkey... Scare
>>
>> ...Syria... Scare
>>
>> ...bureaucracy...waste...fiddling... Dog whistles, tabloid myths and exaggerations, mainly
Ostrich
|
|
I'd say it was wishful thinking for the euro collapsing, more wishful thinking really. People were saying it wouldn't last a year. And at endless points in between and it's still here.
|
>> Looking at the country as a whole... I think some short term pain is worth
>> long term gain.
>>
>> That is the point I am trying to get through to you.
>>
>>
And to the contrary I think that the short term pain would likely be long lasting with little or no chance of long term success to sustain the union through it. So-many economic arguments support remain, I know this is inconvenient to a cause which prizes its grass-roots appeal, I accept that economists can be wrong even, but the consensus is that Brexit is a bad idea for the economy.
Without a compelling argument for how the UK would thrive in a worst-case scenario (no single market access, disadvantaged trading terms with WTO members, capital flight, businesses relocating away, worthless GBP, inability to borrow / junk credit rating etc) then I couldn't be seduced by Brexit, no potential benefits outweigh this from my perspective.
Whilst the UK is innovative, industrious etc, it is a small island which lacks natural resources - this means that at the very least it needs to buy raw materials and those terms of trade may never ever recover.
|
I happen to think some sort of recession is worth it.. and is no big deal in the big scheme of things.
Great if you're on a public sector pension, not so great if your job goes down the pan along with your house.
|
>> Great if you're on a public sector pension, not so great if your job goes
>> down the pan along with your house.
>>
Firstly, I cannot and would not change my own personal circumstances.
Secondly, I think the bigger picture should be looked at... i.e. the country as a whole and what it will be doing in 20/30/50 years time ..and what shenanigans the EU would be up to or trying to be up to.
The bigger picture does not include some ex-copper.... or a retired solicitor married to a cop... and I am not that selfish as to looks solely at my own circs and disregard what is going to happen or is likely to happen, for my 8 year old son and 4 year old daughter.
I believe 'out' is the best way forward for my country and my children.
If I were to be looking at this purely selfishly, then an 'in' vote might be better for me, because of property investment, which in the short term may well go down with an 'out' vote.
|
Meanwhile, the Labour Party, which ought
>> to be pointing this out to them, is nowhere to be seen, which ought to
>> frighten social progressives everywhere.
>>
All part of a plan by all accounts. Labour wanted to avoid doing all the heavy lifting to convince people that they should stay as per the Scottish referendum. I think they thought most of their members think like they do about the eu and that the conservative gov would rip itself to shreds. I don't think that the plan has worked out too well.
|
|
So what's wrong with WP's opinion that a recession that leads to job losses, have people lose houses as a result, maybe some family break-ups due to stress, etc. Can anyone see a problem with this?
|
|
I have an ex-senior Police Officer friend who espouses the same line. OK for her on her 40k pension !
Last edited by: R.P. on Sun 19 Jun 16 at 10:35
|
|
I think RTJ was lampooning WP's position, RP, not espousing his own.
|
>> I think RTJ was lampooning WP's position, RP, not espousing his own.
>>
Correct. West pig will be okay on his police pension with a few houses. What about the ones who lose jobs and homes if there's a recession.
|
>> So what's wrong with WP's opinion that a recession that leads to job losses, have
>> people lose houses as a result, maybe some family break-ups due to stress, etc. Can
>> anyone see a problem with this?
>>
Yes, of course they can, of course I can... but sometimes you need pain before gain. Sometimes you have to make difficult decisions.
Some of us think that the negatives are necessary to create positives for the future.
Use your brain, man... do you honestly think people like me sit at home and come up with our views with no regard at all for other people, no regard at all for any consequences, just decide things on a whim?
How many times on this forum have I argued for the people that are unfortunate in life.. the weak, the poor, the ones with no voice... do you think I've just forgotten them?
Do you really believe 45% or more of the population has or is doing that?... All of them?
|
So WP has compassion for those less fortunate but is happy to sacrifice their jobs, homes and prospects in exchange for protection for events that may never happen and which will affect them anyway if they do.
RR doesn't believe the economic forecasts even when they are all aligned against him.
And Devonite tries to draw parallels between unions created by force (USSR) or by external interference (Yugoslavia) and those that are voluntary associations for mutual gain.
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Sun 19 Jun 16 at 12:37
|
>>And Devonite tries to draw parallels between unions created ............. or by external interference (Yugoslavia)
And what do you think The E.U and America is trying to do to the U.K over Brexit?
|
|
The Telegraph has stayed on the fence till now but this morning urges readers to vote Brexit. It did note over a week ago that it had found that 60% of its readers would vote that way.
|
In my mind, all such "Mergers" will usually fail at some point, whether it be in business or Countries. Humans are no-good at getting on with each other all the time, even at Family level there are arguments and squabbles. Several such systems have crumbled already, The U.S.S.R and Yugoslavia being just two examples, the E.U will eventually be another. I,m actually surprised the U.S.A has held together so long!
When the big break-up comes, which it will, We will be glad we got the Hell out of it when we did, (retrospectively speaking).
|
I don't buy the assumption that a recession will follow a Brexit. For one economic forecasters have a track record akin to a drunk in a betting shop. Two, a Brexit vote on Thursday will not mean we are out of the EU on Friday. It will take at least two years to untangle ourselves by which time the time bombs ticking in Greece and the other basket cases may well have caused the whole thing to start imploding anyway.
I agree with Devonite, if we get out now we'll be thanking our lucky stars we did before it was too late - just as we are with our refusal to adopt to the holy grail of Monopoly money that we were told was essential to our well being not many years ago.
|
Rupert Murdoch backing both sides - Times=Remain: Sunday Times=Leave.
No surprise there, I guess.
|
What amuses me (apart from that) is the God-awful lower than the lowest low life Daily Mail is on the remain side, whilst the, um, esteemed Daily Telegraph is backing the leave campaign. Y'all couldn't make it up really.
:o}
|
EU IN/OUT Referendum Thursday 23/06/16 - Dutchie
