>>I can't better inform myself of the subject matter,
It is really hard to do on this one and quite clearly what follows is my opinion and quite possibly wrong.
Whatever the decision it is unlikely to be a clear disaster or benefit in the short term. It is much more likely to be about a direction of travel from individuals, companies and states over a considerable period of time.
Consequently it is impossible to say with any certainty that one thing or another will happen, or that one will be better than the other. Anybody who says that one course of action will be a disaster or a benefit is merely guessing. All you can do is judge the person and try to work out how much credibility their guess deserves.
Obviously there are a lot of people who feel emotionally about it. Who feel that somehow it is better to have control over your own destiny beyond anything else. Nationalism has its place, but not to the exclusion of all else.
I prefer that a good decision is made, ultimately I don't really care who makes it. OK, it can be galling to feel that you are being told what to do by Brussels, but if Brussels is right, then does that really matter to you?
Business decisions are made over years; companies will gradually lean towards a course of action which seems to work for them. That's why they don't like change. It might seem like they make decisions, but they don't really - or at least not often. Companies have policies - we like Europe, we like free markets, we like regulation, etc., etc or indeed the complete opposite. And then "decisions" are made in line with their preferences.
So no company is going to make a decision because the UK stayed in the EU or because it left. What it will do is influence them over a period of time.
Consequently, whatever the Daily Mail will try to convince its lookers, no company is going to make any major decision in anything like the short term whatever this decision turns out to be.
Its pretty much the same for people. People will not decide to come to the UK, leave the UK, or any possible combination depending on this vote.
In truth, it will be a short term non-event, although God knows the media will try to convince you otherwise.
If you look at our membership of the EU, and much trumpeted it was at the time, nothing happened in the short term. not much in the medium term for that matter. What happened is that over 10 years, perhaps 15, was that the direction of travel leant towards more involvement in Europe. It lowered the importance of some factors and increased the relevance of some others.
Honestly, it may well be that there will never be a particular advantage of being in or out of the EU. It may well simply be a matter of style.
One position or the other will perhaps encourage one behaviour or the other. It is possible that you should vote for the one you fancy, bit like the colour of your front door.
Do you like the idea of gradually less significant national and political borders, increased openness and freedom, but probably less marked differences and delineation? Or do you prefer strong and dramatic "thou shall not cross" national, political and cultural boundaries?
Because whatever the outcome, companies will continue to address all markets, utilise all labour, and sell to and base themselves within whichever country they can make money in. No major company will fail or lose money over this. They just might have to make some changes, which they don't like. Corporations have 25 year business plans. Things changing within 12 months worry them.
Small companies will suffer, but they too will change. Some will go bust and die, but others more suited to the future environment will appear.
People will still travel and live wherever they want to go, although it will just be a bit harder if we're out. But that will only affect a tiny minority.
What I do think is important is a question of relevance. And there I think the EU does matter.
What will continue to ensure the UK holds the greatest relevance, and therefore value, in the world?
Technology, education, ease of business, readily available and accessible market, sound economy, excellent workforce, reliable working practices, safety and security, skillsets, openness, wealth, political participation, global involvement, etc. etc.
And of course so many more subjects.
For me, the EU is a stepping stone to something else. Something that will come after it. But I think its important to be involved now so that we are ready for whatever it evolves into.
I understand the lure of nationalism. believe me, nothing makes you more mouthy about your Britishness and the greatness of the UK like living elsewhere. I understand the desire for strong borders, and the need to look after one's own.
But, for me, those days are passing. We can better ensure the relevance of the UK by participating, by being involved and if possible by leading, greater integration.
Where I differ is that I think we should not follow blindly. And over the last few years we have followed blindly because it was pushed from Brussels. That needs to stop. WE need to have balls, we need to fight our corner, and we need to be a strength.
That needs to come from the electorate. We will see if it ever does.
So, Westpig, for whatever it is worth, ultimately I think you have to make an emotional decision and choose the environment you prefer to be part of.
But, for me, provided that we walk in with the strength and determination, I am quite sure that greater involvement is the way forward.
Please note, greater involvement does not involve capitulation or emasculation.
|
