***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 4 *****
=============================================================
On-going debate about the EU Referendum...
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 27 Feb 16 at 12:36
|
I am starting to get confused which way to vote. I am thinking of voting INN but I am having doubts.
Can somebody explain to me what the consequences are if we vote OUT.
|
>> >>
>> Can somebody explain to me what the consequences are if we vote OUT.
>>
We're finished as far as the Eurovision Song Contest goes.
|
|
Me and the missus will vote OUT. When we voted IN last time (1973?), it was for the EEC, not for all this political union nonsense. Time for something new anyway, rather like a clean pair of socks.
|
|
I think you're on to something there Snowman. The socks probably have holes in, that'll be where the money's gone and why they can't balance the accounts.
|
We're finished as far as the Eurovision Song Contest goes
Won't make the slightest difference. The Eurovision song contest is organised by the European Broadcasting Union and that pre-dates the European Economic Community, later absorbed into the EC we all love, or not.
|
|
I took it as meaning we would get "nil points" all round.
|
>> Can somebody explain to me what the consequences are if we vote OUT.
Nobody knows. There may not be any major consequences at all. I think even LEAVE camp is happy to be within EEC and only wants to be out of political EU.
So far the REMAIN camp is mostly scaremongering by saying economic doom, leaping in the dark etc.
The good consequences of LEAVE could be - control over migration, less stress on school/NHS etc. and more negotiation power with EEC (yes, I think UK market is big and everyone wants to have a slice of it irrespective of whether we are in or out).
|
>>The good consequences of LEAVE could be - control over migration
Do you have four grandparents who were born in the UK?
|
I came to UK as immigrant :o) Work Permit + Highly Skilled Migrant Program (now scheme is closed - funny that skilled migration scheme is closed yet no control on unskilled migration).
Last edited by: movilogo on Thu 25 Feb 16 at 12:02
|
>> (yes, I think UK market is big and
>> everyone wants to have a slice of it irrespective of whether we are in or
>> out).
Look at all the European cars and lorries driving around in this country.. and that's just one sector.... there's no way the EU is going to pull up the drawbridges if we leave the EU.. they'll still want to sell Scania's, BMW's, Citroen's, etc...and we are hardly likely to agree to a one way deal... so they'll take our products.
I think some people forget that we are the 5th largest economy. Anyone would want us on board, inc the EU...it would just be in a different format.
|
You forgot to mention your favourite thing about it all, the "short term pain", and how "short" that would be. It could conceivably be short enough to wreck the rest of my working, earning lifespan.
Put yourself in the shoes of a mid-career private sector employee in the ear of vanishing pensions and see how the world looks. I expect it's hard for a semi-retired public sector employee, but I beseech you to give it some thought before you boldly tick LEAVE.
|
>> You forgot to mention your favourite thing about it all, the "short term pain", and
>> how "short" that would be. It could conceivably be short enough to wreck the rest
>> of my working, earning lifespan.
>>
>> Put yourself in the shoes of a mid-career private sector employee in the ear of
>> vanishing pensions and see how the world looks. I expect it's hard for a semi-retired
>> public sector employee, but I beseech you to give it some thought before you boldly
>> tick LEAVE.
>>
Oh, I see.
I shouldn't be looking at what I think is the best overall interests of our country as a whole, so that my children... and those that come along in the future... get the best deal across the spectrum... i.e. not just the monetary value but the freedoms that leaving the EU would provide.
I should look at the view of a 'mid-career private sector employee in the ear of vanishing pensions' despite the fact I realise that is only one small aspect of a rather large consideration.
Let me think about that for a nano second....
|
I think you'll find my cohort is a rather large consideration, WP. It's the one which earns money and has to spend it. You know, that stuff that doesn't grow on trees and makes the world go round?
You're being the I'm-alright-Jack in this, as is the wont of most pensioners and baby-boomers (baby-busters, more like).
|
>> You're being the I'm-alright-Jack in this, as is the wont of most pensioners and baby-boomers
>> (baby-busters, more like).
>>
In your opinion.
I cannot change the fact (and wouldn't want to anyway) that aged 17, not really having a clue as to what profession i'd join (as my chosen field, following my father in the merchant navy, was closed off due to my colour blindness)... I stumbled almost by chance into the police... and it has given me a good pension. At the time I joined and for some considerable years afterwards the word 'pension' wasn't anywhere in my rationale.
Now, that's where I am. Does that mean in your world that I am wholly unable to join the debate.. purely because I am in a different set of circumstances to you?
I had to work shifts for nigh on 31 years, it's not healthy doing those sorts of hours and not good for family life working Christmas Day etc.. and it was a job that had its dangers and stress.. (my IBS was apparently from that) and life expectancy rates were always fairly low (I think it has changed somewhat nowadays).
I think what I think because of the bigger picture, which now you've had cause to mention it is easier to achieve because I don't need to be short term selfish and just look at my own circumstances.
|
All well and good but you fail to mention why your view of the bigger picture and how it will pan out to the benefit of us all is in any way based on any evidence whatsoever.
I do maintain though that your experience of work and pensions (in financial terms) is very narrow and safe and so colours your views, and spits out a conclusion at odds with the financial realities of the world.
I'd like to add by the way (hopefully without sounding like a suck-up) that I thank you and admire for your service and all those who choose to do likewise. I'd not do the job if you tripled the pay and pensions.
And I wish you'd sold me that 407 Coupe. ;-)
|
>> All well and good but you fail to mention why your view of the bigger
>> picture and how it will pan out to the benefit of us all is in
>> any way based on any evidence whatsoever.
It isn't based on any evidence... and neither is yours...because there isn't any evidence, we are in uncharted territory. All you can do is look at all the knowns and summise.
However, common sense tells us that plenty of countries trade on their own, we are the 5th richest country in the world for GDP and even if we went temporarily backwards (which isn't a given), there's no reason why we couldn't survive or prosper.
>>
>> I do maintain though that your experience of work and pensions (in financial terms) is
>> very narrow and safe and so colours your views, and spits out a conclusion at
>> odds with the financial realities of the world.
Maybe, maybe not. I see no reason why an educated person cannot look at all the facts and views and then come to a sensible decision.
I also bear in mind that my f-i-l who is an entrepreneurial spirit having been an owner/ director of many companies (and currently owns rather a nice hotel) is considerably more 'out' than I am.... by quite some distance.
>>
>> I'd like to add by the way (hopefully without sounding like a suck-up) that I
>> thank you and admire for your service and all those who choose to do likewise.
>> I'd not do the job if you tripled the pay and pensions.
Thank you.
|
>> I had to work shifts for nigh on 31 years, it's not healthy doing those
>> sorts of hours and not good for family life working Christmas Day etc.. and it
>> was a job that had its dangers and stress..
Sounds a bit like the Navy, I have a comfortable pension and feel I have earned it. Maybe you should do the same Alanovic.
|
Yeah, you see ON, I'm not knocking what folks like you and WP have done, but I'm questioning the value of the judgements of people who have not experienced the modern private workplace.
We can't all be coppers and nuclear fart tube inhabitants. Can we? Could we all be employed by the State in worthy, brave, manly professions? Let's ask the Soviet Union...........
I do my bit, though. Don't you worry. I have the private school bills to prove it.
Oh, and as for 31 years in work, my generation will have to do about 50. Nice. You enjoy your well earned pension, I'll have to wait a bit for mine.
Last edited by: Alanović on Thu 25 Feb 16 at 13:24
|
>> it
>> >> was a job that had its dangers and stress..
My job's danger and stress is turning up to work one day and finding it's no longer there because Brexit.
Then your pensions aren't going to look too clever when my firm's shares are worthless.
|
>> My job's danger and stress is turning up to work one day and finding it's
>> no longer there because Brexit.
>>
From what you have said your job is in some form of IT.
Would have thought the major stress there (or in my case, here) is likely to be down to either the job disappears as technology moves on or the job moves to Bangalore or similar.
Last edited by: commerdriver on Thu 25 Feb 16 at 14:10
|
>> From what you have said your job is in some form of IT.
>> Would have thought the major stress there (or in my case, here) is likely to
>> be down to either the job disappears as technology moves on or the job moves
>> to Bangalore or similar.
>>
Most jobs are at some risk of offshoring, but there is a trend recently towards re-shoring. Apologies for the crummy jargon. I assess the risk to be greater in a UK outside the EU.
|
>> >>
>> Then your pensions aren't going to look too clever when my firm's shares are worthless.
>>
Speaking as one of the millions who will only have the state pension...
|
>>Now, that's where I am. Does that mean in your world that I am wholly unable to join the
>>debate.. purely because I am in a different set of circumstances to you?
I'm 100% with Alanovic' here (tho' not as bitter sounding).
You, WP, have your gold-plated (cut that, pure gold) pension, until you die. I don't resent you a penny of that. But I do think that there should be a cut-off of 50 or 55 for voting on this one. Brexit will take us ten to fifteen years to get over, and there's certainly doubt as to whether it will be a permanent diminution in income or only temporary. (Pro-leave article in Telegraph this morning saying there will be a downturn if we leave.)
This is about the long-term future of the country. Why those in the (statistically) last thirty years of their life should have a significant input into what the country is going to look like in thirty years' time I think is hard to say.
And why those who have an income from the state until they die so are entirely insulated from the realities of the likely downturn from leaving should have a vote I do not know.
>>I don't need to be short term selfish
That's exactly what you will be. Vote Out and many people will lose their jobs; you don't need to worry about that as you are insulated from this.
|
I've seen some odd arguements on here, and this one is up there. Only certain people can see the bigger picture because they've a different career? Everyone is coloured by their experiences, how could you not be?
Some will have seen and experienced things others, won't no has a monoply on life experience.
|
>> But I do think that there should be a cut-off of 50 or 55 for voting on this one.
>>
>> And why those who have an income from the state until they die so are
>> entirely insulated from the realities of the likely downturn from leaving should have a vote
>> I do not know.
>>
That's the way democracy works
The idea that anyone over 55 doesn't care about the future is nonsense
Most of us "oldies", on here anyway, have children, many have grandchildren. How can we not care about their future?
|
>>Most of us "oldies", on here anyway, have children, many have grandchildren. How can we
>>not care about their future?
I'm sure you do. But the youngsters will be more likely to be voting "stay" when the older ones are more likely to be voting "leave".
So if the older voters care about the opinions of the younger ones - rather than just 'caring' about them in some woolly fashion - they will vote to stay.
|
>> So if the older voters care about the opinions of the younger ones - rather
>> than just 'caring' about them in some woolly fashion - they will vote to stay.
>>
I didn't say anything about caring for them or caring about their opinions I said "care about their futures"
Many people, I would hope most people, will be thinking about the wider picture in this referendum not just any personal impacts, that's how I think most people vote in an election.
Maybe I am over optimistic but I think most people are not selfish or self centered.
|
>> Maybe I am over optimistic but I think most people are not selfish or self centered.
>>
It's not us oldies you need to worry about, have you heard of the "me first" generation?
|
|
Yes, otherwise known as "baby boomers".
|
"But I do think that there should be a cut-off of 50 or 55 for voting on this one."
Pity, because it would cut out the sensible, experienced, grown-up section of the populus.
|
>> >> the freedoms that leaving the EU would provide.
Hang on, woah, did you really just write that without any consideration to the freedoms we would lose? Ask Roger about them, he benefitted from them for 10 years. Oh hang on, maybe not. He doesn't seem to understand them either and wants to deprive the rest of us of them.
:-(
|
>> Hang on, woah, did you really just write that without any consideration to the freedoms
>> we would lose?
What in reality would we lose?
There's Brits living all over the world. Do you really think the EU would clam up completely?
|
|
It would make it far more difficult and far less desirable to relocate at will, for work or retirement reasons. if you pick on that thread, the consequences for the economy and people's freedoms are stark.
|
>> It would make it far more difficult and far less desirable to relocate at will,
>> for work or retirement reasons. if you pick on that thread, the consequences for the
>> economy and people's freedoms are stark.
>>
The economy is open to a good debate, (but even then I don't think it would tank to the extent of 'stark', nowhere near)..however people's freedom's curtailed to the degree it would be 'stark'...I don't think so, not in the slightest.
|
>> It would make it far more difficult and far less desirable to relocate at will,
>> for work or retirement reasons.
I don't think that follows, the most popular places for expats are outside the EU.
|
Wealthy ones. The EU has enabled the more ordinary retiree to head abroad.
Do you honestly believe that removing freedoms to travel, work and live abroad won't make any diffeence to people wanting to travel, work and live abroad? We're in the realms of delusional rubbish here.
|
>> Wealthy ones. The EU has enabled the more ordinary retiree to head abroad.
>>
>> Do you honestly believe that removing freedoms to travel, work and live abroad won't make
>> any diffeence to people wanting to travel, work and live abroad?
All I'm doing is pointing out a fact. The most popular countries for expats are outside the EU.
I'm not sure of any evidence that there are more wealthy ones outside the EU?
We're in the realms
>> of delusional rubbish here.
>>
You don't have to have a bead on about it, I'm not some sort of looney.
|
>> >> Wealthy ones. The EU has enabled the more ordinary retiree to head abroad.
>> >> The most popular countries for expats are
>> outside the EU.
>> I'm not sure of any evidence that there are more wealthy ones outside the EU?
I was talking about wealthy British pensioners being able to retire outside the EU, not there being wealthy countries outside the EU (of which there are many, of course, in any case, but that wasn't the point I was trying to make).
>> You don't have to have a bead on about it, I'm not some sort of
>> looney.
>>
What's a bead?
It's funny, you and I always seem to manage to misunderstand eachother completely. Just one of those things, I gues.
Peace and love to you.
|
>> I was talking about wealthy British pensioners being able to retire outside the EU, not there being wealthy countries outside the EU (of which there are many, of course, in any case, but that wasn't the point I was trying to make).
So was I. Just wondered where you got the idea that it was mainly wealthy pensioners outside the eu?
Anyway my first point was that the extra rules of living and working outside the eu aren't a hindrance to the millions that do live outside the eu.
Now I'm not having a go, that's just what the numbers are.
>> >> You don't have to have a bead on about it, I'm not some sort
>> of
>> >> looney.
>> What's a bead?
Its just a local phrase it means getting hot under the collar, all excited etc. I think it comes from something to do with beads of sweat.
>> It's funny, you and I always seem to manage to misunderstand eachother completely. Just one
>> of those things, I guess.
Do we? Just a bit of a discussion nothing more.
>> Peace and love to you.
>>
Word.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Fri 26 Feb 16 at 09:57
|
>> Wealthy ones. The EU has enabled the more ordinary retiree to head abroad.
>>
>> Do you honestly believe that removing freedoms to travel, work and live abroad won't make
>> any diffeence to people wanting to travel, work and live abroad? We're in the realms
>> of delusional rubbish here.
>>
You have somewhat changed the goalposts.
If you are saying that those with nowt or very little will find it harder to go abroad in the EU if they wish... because we'd prevent people with nowt or very little coming here... then 'yes' i'd tend to agree with you.
|
>> www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12171049/Revealed-Two-thirds-of-British-voters-are-Eurosceptics-but-they-arent-convinced-we-should-leave.html
>>
>> IMO it could go either way.
I'd say I fall into that camp. I'm deeply unconvinced by Union etc. etc., and I don't think it's right. But being OUT has the potential for disaster (with no way of establishing the likelihood of this) whereas being IN has the potential only for severe irritation and the likelihood of lesser irritation.
|
>> Just a wild stab in the dark.
>>
>> Interesting, assume for a moment that they are correct and representative, I take it
>> you're genuinely surprised the numbers are so close?
No, not surprised. I are disappoint.
|
The telegraph survey is really confirmation of the bleeding obvious which is that
- many people think international cooperation is a good thing that should grown, not shrunk,
- but that the EU is a defective apparatus for doing it.
That makes it a difficult decision to make even with an understanding of the issues, that hinges partly on whether you think that the best course is to be in and try to make it work, or out, and at least partly insulated from some possibly difficult problems (such as the failure of the single currency, which even Juncker thinks cannot survive without Schengen, although I don't pretend to understand that unless it seriously affects free movement and right to work of EU citizens).
I think this is worth looking at:
woodfordfunds.com/insight/brexit-economic-implications/
including both the Capital Economics report and the short video of Neil Woodford.
|
|
One good reason to stay in is that certain MPs may resign their cabinet posts including the lovely Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Gove.
|
>> think this is worth looking at:
woodfordfunds.com/insight/brexit-economic-implications/
It certainly is. A very useful posting which clears the decks for concentration on other aspects of Brexit.
|
>> It certainly is. A very useful posting which clears the decks for concentration on other
>> aspects of Brexit.
Thanks Ambo, succinctly put.
|
>> I think this is worth looking at:
>>
>> woodfordfunds.com/insight/brexit-economic-implications/
From the comments: "If we stay in every financial service product will have to be sharia compliant."
Wow. No more interest. On anything. Ever. Sounds plausible.
|
>> From the comments: "If we stay in every financial service product will have to be
>> sharia compliant."
>>
I think the comments section on this, like most other comments on internet sites make this forum look very mild and uncontentious.
A typical load of trolls, clowns and loudmouths with a few misguided individuals who try to make serious points.
|
Obviously cobblers, but since you mention it...
I did some work with an Islamic bank a few years ago. They didn't pay interest, but they did pay 'profit share' at rates remarkably similar to interest rates elsewhere.
Interest is not allowed, but profit is OK. There are Sharia-compliant mortgages too, in which basically the bank buys the house and then sells it to the customer in instalments, at a profit. The cash flows again are remarkably similar to those of a non-Sharia mortgage.
Personal loans, in which a customer would normally just borrow money from a bank and pay back with interest, are a bit more complex to arrange compliantly.
- Bank buys £x worth of (say) copper on London metal exchange (LME)
- Customer agrees to buy the metal from the bank at £x + £y, payable in instalments
- Customer immediately - contemporaneously, near enough - sells the metal on the LME for £x - a bit, thereby getting his hands on the 'principal'.
- Bank, which has laid out £x, gets back £x + £y from customer over the agreed period.
An interesting source of income for the metal brokers.
|
|
The idea that strict religious rules can be circumvented by the use of technology of the sort that is used in clever tax planning schemes beggars belief.
|
>> The idea that strict religious rules can be circumvented by the use of technology of
>> the sort that is used in clever tax planning schemes beggars belief.
>>
You are assuming that religious belief and logic co-exist...
|
>>You are assuming that religious belief and logic co-exist...
But this is a prime example of religious belief and logic co-existing! Take your belief, and apply a strict and logical legal brain to it ion order to wriggle out of the consequences of your belief.
Either it's sinful to lend money and get a return from it (which is surely what the prophet meant); or it's only sinful to lend money and get a return if you call the return 'interest' rather than 'equity share' or whatever.
|
Belief of any kind (political, religious etc ) is difficult to stick to
Hypocrisy of some kind is usually the alternate, sometimes it is dressed up to look acceptable but it is still usually hypocrisy.
|
>>
>> Either it's sinful to lend money and get a return from it (which is surely
>> what the prophet meant); or it's only sinful to lend money and get a return
>> if you call the return 'interest' rather than 'equity share' or whatever.
>>
There is surely a difference between lending money for a period and then getting it back again, and being a genuine co-partner in some enterprise and then apportioning the gains?
In the first case the risk rests with the borrower, in the second they share the risk of the enterprise failing.
Is that really the case with a sharia "loan"? If your business doesn't succeed, or your car depreciates in value, the bank shares your losses?
|
>> In the first case the risk rests with the borrower, in the second they share
>> the risk of the enterprise failing.
>> Is that really the case with a sharia "loan"? If your business doesn't succeed, or
>> your car depreciates in value, the bank shares your losses?
Er...no the bank is in exactly the same position from a risk perspective with a Sharia loan as a conventional one.
Islamic scholars are consulted in the same way as another bank might get counsel's opinion on its proposed terms and conditions to make sure they are compliant and enforceable. And as with barristers, the scholars don't always agree with each other.
|
Le Canard Enchainé French satirical weekly has paid very little attention to Brexit but today has two cartoons and a short news item on it. In one of the cartoons Boris offers his alternative, a "capillary alliance" with the USA.
Another cartoon highlights Trump's squabble with the Pope, with the caption "How many aircraft carriers does the Vatican have?" It seems the hairy nutcase came out in support of torture a short while back but then another cartoon added the rider "...but not to the extent of hair-pulling".
|
I don't want us to leave the EU any more than I would have wanted Scotland to leave the UK.
Anyone who has been through divorce knows the true meaning of 'amicable'...
|
>> Anyone who has been through divorce knows the true meaning of 'amicable'...
Just ask Messrs Cameron and Gove who share(d) babysitting.
|
>> Vote Out and many people will lose their jobs
Why? I have lost job when UK was under EU. These are all speculations. Economy might even improve after leaving EU. The so called business institutions are striking the same chord just because they want to hire cheaper labours from far Eastern European market. In fact, I think lot of people in other countries (within EU) will lose jobs!
HSBC said they could leave UK but now already said they would not. Because they have realized that leaving UK is no good for them. Still from time to time they keep on scaremongering how horrible life could be without EU.
Is leaving EU same as leaving EEC? Countries can be outside EU but still within EEC.
It is human nature to maintain status quo because of inertia. Sometimes not doing anything (i.e. not challenging status quo) is not the cheapest option - but most expensive.
|
I have for now accepted the view that it is not an economic argument, but a political one.
www.ft.com/cms/s/0/db390a7c-db1a-11e5-a72f-1e7744c66818.html
|
>> I have for now accepted the view that it is not an economic argument, but
>> a political one.
>>
It is definitely a political argument but there will undoubtedly by economic decisions and consequences.
|
>> It is definitely a political argument but there will undoubtedly by economic decisions and consequences.
Yes. In either case, most depends on what we make of it. I think Woodford gives some value in the Brexit scenario to UK being able to tailor its trade agreements to suit itself, rather than a compromise/other countries in the EU. He also expects disruption and a fall in GBP (not all bad) in that scenario.
|
>> Yes. In either case, most depends on what we make of it. I think Woodford
>> gives some value in the Brexit scenario to UK being able to tailor its trade
>> agreements to suit itself, rather than a compromise/other countries in the EU. He also expects
>> disruption and a fall in GBP (not all bad) in that scenario.
>>
Woodford is a successful fund manager his views are still those of an individual, nobody really knows what the next few years will bring either way we all have to take our own view and balance the risks as we see them.
I have yet to see anything to make me think Brexit would be good for me or my family.
|
>> Woodford is a successful fund manager his views are still those of an individual,
Yes, but an individual who started with a high degree of knowledge and has commissioned proper research on the subject.
Also one of the rare sources who is not trying to make one case or the other.
|
>> Is leaving EU same as leaving EEC? Countries can be outside EU but still within
>> EEC.
>>
I may be wrong but I don't believe there is an EEC in any official form any more.
We will remain part of Europe as that is a geographical rather than a political/economic definition
We will also remain part of the world, we can trade with anybody, in or out of the EU.
|
|
Statements of the obvious don't really get us much further in the debate, cd. It's the nature, ease and costs of that trade which needs to be considered.
|
>> Statements of the obvious don't really get us much further in the debate, cd. It's
>> the nature, ease and costs of that trade which needs to be considered.
>>
Sorry it was just to clarify Movilogo's comment further up from which it got a bit separated.
|
Movilogo who as an immigrant himself dislikes other immigrants.
Farage, married to a foreigner, who dislikes foreigners (and takes a pretty salary from the EU).
Weird.
|
On both counts, I would say that's an assumption too far to make.
Pat
|
>> On both counts, I would say that's an assumption too far to make.
>>
>> Pat
Movilogo's background and views are clear to anyone who reads his posts. Which bit do you think is an assumption too far?
Ditto Farage.
|
>> Farage, married to a foreigner, who dislikes foreigners (and takes a pretty salary from the
>> EU).
>>
>> Weird.
>>
I think that's wrong.
I see Farage as being the boy in the story 'the emperor has no clothes on'. He's willing to state the obvious when others fudge it.
Furthermore, I haven't seen anything he's said as being anti-foreigner, that's just a smokescreen put up by those who disagree with him and want to shoot down his argument so theirs comes to the forefront.
I see Farage as being against unchecked immigration or unnecessary unskilled immigration, much the same as the Aussies are.
.... and I 100% agree with him, if I've accurately assessed him, (I don't know him personally and don't follow UKIP that closely, so it's just my opinion).
|
WP has nailed it above, but it's the word 'dislike' on both counts I have a problem with.
It implies a personal opinion is colouring an opinion of what they both consider is best for the long term benefit of the UK.
We have no way of knowing either Movilogo or Farage's likes and dislikes, and shouldn't assume we have.
Pat
|
|
I am becoming more and more confused whether we should stay IN or OUT.
|
tinyurl.com/zm7hpsw
It's like watching people you love having marriage difficulties, the arguments get ever more myopic and petty by the day and the destructive machinations get worse.
After the vote (which I imagine will be close), almost half of the country will resent the other half because a) they're still stuck in the EU or b) their economy, world status and safety will (at least for some period of time) implode.
Not great really ?
If the surveys about the education level and age of those with various positions are correct, there is a talent and age demographic dimension to this too which will likely impact future generations more than those who vote now.
|
Whilst checking my news feed.
From a more right leaning paper: tinyurl.com/o8y3l6a
Suggests that there may be some wider consequences of Brexit than freeing the UK from the down-side of EU membership, not a problem if it doesn't inconvenience your demographic of course.
|
|
They would say that, wouldn't they.
|
Roughly half of all the big names and news sources say leaving the EU is a bad idea. And roughly the other half of all the big names and news sources say leaving the EU is a good idea.
So as no-one really knows (they just say they do), and will do little to influence voters, it is reasonable to suggest the count of the actual vote will be very, very close. And on that basis, instead of settling the matter, the issue will rumble on for years. Also, suppose a vote to leave is passed, by a very small margin after lots of recounts - will the government actually do it, or will the vote be repeated until 'Call me Dave' gets the answer he wants?
Last edited by: Slidingpillar on Fri 26 Feb 16 at 10:02
|
>> So as no-one really knows (they just say they do), and will do little to influence voters, it is reasonable to suggest the count of the actual vote will be very, very close. And on that basis, instead of settling the matter, the issue will rumble on for years
That is the fundamental issue. If result is 52-48 then it is far more frustrating to accept than 70-30 result, for example.
Is there any summary version what is meant to be in EU? I am not looking for 1000 pages document but a 5-page summary.
Then everyone can take an informed approach whether it is better to be in or out.
I am yet to see any report on a tabular comparison - left hand what will happen if we are in EU and right hand what if we leave.
My guess someone has prepared it but won't show to general public.
Last edited by: movilogo on Fri 26 Feb 16 at 11:26
|
>> I am yet to see any report on a tabular comparison - left hand what
>> will happen if we are in EU and right hand what if we leave.
>>
>> My guess someone has prepared it but won't show to general public.
Unfortunately, you can't get the answer to everything with a spreadsheet.
But don't worry, that nice Liz Truss said on QT last night that some 'neutral' civil servants are producing an assessment (on instructions from the government).
Last edited by: Manatee on Fri 26 Feb 16 at 11:49
|
>> They would say that, wouldn't they.
And you would say that wouldn't you.
The point is that Owen has always been a hard core enthusiast for Europe, so for once the headline makes some sense.
There are some "facts" around but it's incredibly hard to find any interpretation or commentary that is not from somebody who is pushing one view or the other (such as yourself), and I tend to discount those by about 90%.
I suppose that's why I have linked to Neil Woodford's comments a couple of times. I imagine he has a preference (probably 'remain' as it reduces risk for better or worse) but for understandable reasons he has focused on one aspect which is risk to business and the economy.
I hold to the view that it is a political decision not an economic one.
There is already a lot of uncertainty around at the moment, the Chinese economy, Russia, Syria and elsewhere.
In the end I suspect that with the aid of the government's 'Project Fear' the cautious view - that Brexit would just add to all that at a time when there are already a lot of unpredictably moving parts - will influence enough voters to carry the day and 'remain' will be the answer.
|
>>remain' will be the answer.
Let us pray for that.
|
>> >>remain' will be the answer.
>>
>> Let us pray for that.
>>
Let us pray for the opposite.
|
>>Let us pray for the opposite.
I'm with ^this gentleman, along with 000,000's of others.
|
Yes, I suppose there will be a lot of disenfranchised old men about right enough. Fortunately, there will hopefully be sufficient others to keep them at bay.
;-)
|
Wisdom doesn't always come with age. But age always comes with experience.
:}
|
Manatee, it amuses me that so-called left wingers like Galloway and Owen are suddenly darlings of the generally right-wing Outies.
I suppose the same could be said for those of us left of Genghis Khan who are suddenly agreeing with Dave and Co.
Maybe this sudden blurring of the left-right paradigm will spark a sudden age of peace and understanding and an end to yah boo sucks politics. I always was a hopeless dreamer.........
|
I don't think anything is ever going to persuade me to take Galloway as a resliable source for anything, although he does occasionally get something right - probably for the wrong reasons!
I've never really felt allegiance to right or left as labels, although in attitudes I think I am a left wing libertarian more than anything.
Given a choice between an authoritarian left and a libertarian right, I would be true blue.
If you think that Cameron is to the right of Genghis Khan in any way, then the chances of a breakdown of the paradigm must be pretty slim; but it would be nice. But you only have to express an opinion, any opinion, to be put in a box.
|
>> If you think that Cameron is to the right of Genghis Khan
No, of course not.
|
>>an end to yah boo sucks politics.
No, it's just that different groupings are yahing and booing to [/at] each other.
Last edited by: Mapmaker on Fri 26 Feb 16 at 14:11
|
Being at home yesterday morning I got first dibs at the copy of Commercial Motor when it dropped through the door.
I was surprised to see a poll in there taken from a wide range of large and small haulage companies.
The results were 73% to leave and 27% to stay.
I have looked online but can't find this and Ian has it in the lorry with him today so don't ask me to prove it:)
Pat
|
www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/OverseasTradeStatistics/Pages/EU_and_Non-EU_Data.aspx
So UK imports more from EU than it exports.
However, UK exports more to non-EU countries.
Surely then EU has more to lose if UK leaves the union?
|
>>Surely then EU has more to lose if UK leaves the union?
Perhaps, but so what? Or do you mean that whatever we may lose will be ok because someone else lost more?
In fact I was with a group of senior and successful investment people yesterday and that was their considered and agreed opinion;
Leaving the EU will be bad for the UK but much worse for the EU.
They will leave significant investment transactions, despite the decisions already being made, to the beginning of June.
I'm not sure that I agree with them, but then they control >$50Bn and I don't so I'm not sure my opinion is relevant.
However, I entirely don't get your point that its ok to suffer a bad impact as long as someone else suffers more.
|
>> However, I entirely don't get your point that its ok to suffer a bad impact as long as someone else suffers more.
My point is that UK won't suffer any economic impact because other EU countries won't dare to raise any trade barrier because it will hurt them more.
atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/gbr/
UK exports $46B to Germany but imports $88B from there.
Leaving EU means UK might be able to negotiate far better terms of trade with larger economies like China, India, USA, Japan etc.
|
>> My point is that UK won't suffer any economic impact because other EU countries won't
>> dare to raise any trade barrier because it will hurt them more.
Somebody send the van round with the men in the dark suits to take his vote into protective custody.
|
>> Somebody send the van round with the men in the dark suits to take his
>> vote into protective custody.
>>
movilogo has a perfectly valid point. When it comes to agreeing tariffs, lower is better for the EU (Germany in particular) because its exports to UK exceed its imports. It's about leverage and self interest.
|
Rubbish. On so many levels.
"The EU won't *dare* to raise" ?????
We will have the same trade barriers as any non EU country has. Automatically.
Whether or not that will matter is another point.
This is very much a political and social event, much more than economic.
For that I would like a narrow "IN" vote and the argument to continue rumbling on forever. That way we should get what I think is best, and have an environment which will keep it all under control.
|
>> Rubbish. On so many levels.
Care to explain how?
UK can be out of EU but still in EEC.
Albert Einstein once said "If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."
Unless someone clearly explain why UK will be worse off economically outside EU, I am assuming all is just scaremongering.
|
>>Care to explain how?
I have, several times. In this particular case I actually explained in the note you just replied to.
And it doesn't matter how simply I write, if you don't read.
|
A Norwegian minister (or former minister - I was getting ready in a hurry and not taking notes) was on Today this morning. She explained that Norway gets access to the Single Market but only by virtue of paying contributions similar to those of a full member state. So Nige's claim that we could get back his precious '£55m a day' and continue free-trading as we do today is pure illusion. He probably knows it, too.
And, of course, Norway has to abide by all those rules it's not allowed to influence. So where's the gain for the UK?
Oh, and Movi: there's a world of difference between 'simply' and 'simplistically'.
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Fri 26 Feb 16 at 16:26
|
EU IN/OUT Referendum Thursday 23/6/16 Volume 2. - Mapmaker
