EU referendum

[buctootim]

For those blinkered Remainians who trumpet the risks that they associate with us leaving but refuse to acknowledge that there are also risks in staying in, here is an interesting article pointing out the significant risk implications to our economy if we stay in and certain likely circumstances come to pass.

 

http://masterinvestor.co.uk/brexit/britain-sucked-eu-bailout-vortex/

 

Even though we are not in the Euro-zone, we could still end up paying billions into the EU budget to bail out the deficits caused by the collapse of those member states with basket case economies in the Euro-zone.

 

3/10

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33556085

[buctootim]

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/05/12/eu-migration-twice-high-previously-thought-ons-admits/

 

Staggering underestimate of the actual immigration numbers. All we need now is for some prominent figure in the Remain camp to dismiss them as a drop in the ocean.

 

Issuing a NI number is not a reliable indication of immigration. An NI number is a prerequisite to working, so its the first thing people will do when they arrive seeking work. Many will return home.

[Whitey Grandad]

Issuing a NI number is not a reliable indication of immigration. An NI number is a prerequisite to working, so its the first thing people will do when they arrive seeking work. Many will return home.

 

It's been known for decades that the number of NI numbers far as exceeds the number of people in the country, by a factor of two or something.

[Lord Duckhunter]

. Why are we so unpopular within the EU?

 

I don't know the answer to that , but I do know that Europeans by and large buy into the EU . This is because their leaders have be honest with them , explain the concept and generally focus on the positives . We are lied to, conned , and treated like plebs . Pro EU politicians never ever praise it, always talk of it needing reform and try to make out its just a trading bloc , with a tiny bit of " shared sovereignty " . That's why this vote will not change a thing , the country will still have suspicious thoughts over it, we'll still be having the same old arguments 40 years from now. This will not be a once and for all decision over our place in the EU , because we're given a version of it that only exists to win a referendum. The Europeans accept it warts and all, our political class don't have the balls to persuade us to.

Edited 13 May, 2016 by Lord Duckhunter

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/05/12/eu-migration-twice-high-previously-thought-ons-admits/

 

Staggering underestimate of the actual immigration numbers. All we need now is for some prominent figure in the Remain camp to dismiss them as a drop in the ocean.

 

As others have already said, and was indeed reported on the news last night, the explanation for the apparent discrepancy is that EU immigrants arriving here for temporary work contracts - such as those helping to pick the summer crops for example - also require a NI number by law. These people soon return home, so they are not counted officially as 'permanent' immigration. I suppose all these fit young people might make some impact on our 'Welfare State' while they are over here enriching both themselves and our economy - but only a minimal one I suspect.

 

If you disaprove of this aspect of our modern economy for some reason then perhaps you could please explain how else short term vacancies of this type are to be fullfilled in this current labour market? Or should we just leave the crops in the field and let them rot?

 

You also forgot to make the usual blanket dismissal of Mark Carney's start warning of the dangers that lay ahead of us should we leave the EU - or should I say the Govenor of the Bank of England and unanimous opinion of the entire Monetary Policy Committee ... oh and 200 other economists who wrote saying much the same thing to the 'Times' this week.

[Wes Tender]

As others have already said, and was indeed reported on the news last night, the explanation for the apparent discrepancy is that EU immigrants arriving here for temporary work contracts - such as those helping to pick the summer crops for example - also require a NI number by law. These people soon return home, so they are not counted officially as 'permanent' immigration. I suppose all these fit young people might make some impact on our 'Welfare State' while they are over here enriching both themselves and our economy - but only a minimal one I suspect.

 

If you disaprove of this aspect of our modern economy for some reason then perhaps you could please explain how else short term vacancies of this type are to be fullfilled in this current labour market? Or should we just leave the crops in the field and let them rot?

 

You also forgot to make the usual blanket dismissal of Mark Carney's start warning of the dangers that lay ahead of us should we leave the EU - or should I say the Govenor of the Bank of England and unanimous opinion of the entire Monetary Policy Committee ... oh and 200 other economists who wrote saying much the same thing to the 'Times' this week.

 

You already know my stance on the opinion of the Governor of the Bank of England, and also the opinions of Cameron and Osborne on their doom and gloom prophecies.

 

If you listened to the conclusion I reached right from the outset, I am content to balance the risks of our leaving the EU against the benefits that I perceive we will gain from trading with the rest of the World unhampered by the restraints of our EU membership. I know that your mind is made up, so please accept my position that although there are risks to the economy either way, it is the several other factors involved in our decision which I consider to weigh more heavily in favour of us leaving.

 

I note that I still have not received an answer to these questions I asked of you:-

 

Should we have total control of our own borders and who we allow to enter our country?

Should our elected Parliament have supremacy over the unelected EU Commission?

Should our Law Courts have supremacy over the European Justice system?

Is the EU becoming too big and unwieldy? Or should it be expanded still further?

Do you approve of our further integration into a Federal United States of Europe?

Does the massive EU bureaucracy imposed on small businesses hamper them?

Would we benefit from the freedom to negotiate our own trade deals with those nations around the World whose economies are developing the fastest?

Should we reclaim our own territorial waters to revitalise our fishing industry?

Is it preferable that the British Government decides how British taxpayers' monies given to the EU is spent, rather than have them decide how our money is distributed back to us?

Does the unlimited free movement of peoples impose massive pressures on our NHS, housing infrastructure and employment sectors?

 

I accept that your position appears to based solely on the economic repercussions which are largely a matter of conjecture anyway, but you don't seem very keen at all to debate these other considerations.

[Whitey Grandad]

You already know my stance on the opinion of the Governor of the Bank of England, and also the opinions of Cameron and Osborne on their doom and gloom prophecies.

 

If you listened to the conclusion I reached right from the outset, I am content to balance the risks of our leaving the EU against the benefits that I perceive we will gain from trading with the rest of the World unhampered by the restraints of our EU membership. I know that your mind is made up, so please accept my position that although there are risks to the economy either way, it is the several other factors involved in our decision which I consider to weigh more heavily in favour of us leaving.

 

I note that I still have not received an answer to these questions I asked of you:-

 

Should we have total control of our own borders and who we allow to enter our country?

Should our elected Parliament have supremacy over the unelected EU Commission?

Should our Law Courts have supremacy over the European Justice system?

Is the EU becoming too big and unwieldy? Or should it be expanded still further?

Do you approve of our further integration into a Federal United States of Europe?

Does the massive EU bureaucracy imposed on small businesses hamper them?

Would we benefit from the freedom to negotiate our own trade deals with those nations around the World whose economies are developing the fastest?

Should we reclaim our own territorial waters to revitalise our fishing industry?

Is it preferable that the British Government decides how British taxpayers' monies given to the EU is spent, rather than have them decide how our money is distributed back to us?

Does the unlimited free movement of peoples impose massive pressures on our NHS, housing infrastructure and employment sectors?

 

I accept that your position appears to based solely on the economic repercussions which are largely a matter of conjecture anyway, but you don't seem very keen at all to debate these other considerations.

 

What is this 'massive bureaucracy' of which you speak? I have never experienced any. Please offer an example or a frinstance.

[buctootim]

The IMF says the economic cost of leaving would be between "pretty bad to very, very bad". http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36284200

 

I wonder how many of remain would accept "pretty bad" as a price worth paying but would baulk at "very very bad"

[aintforever]

The IMF says the economic cost of leaving would be between "pretty bad to very, very bad". http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36284200

 

I wonder how many of remain would accept "pretty bad" as a price worth paying but would baulk at "very very bad"

 

having to wait an hour and a half for an ambulance is very very bad, so is having to work for peanuts because there is an endless supply of cheap polish labour. So is having to pay through the nose to rent a house because of the housing crisis.

 

These people said the same about joining the Euro but it all turned out to be nonsense, why listen to them now?

[buctootim]

having to wait an hour and a half for an ambulance is very very bad, so is having to work for peanuts because there is an endless supply of cheap polish labour. So is having to pay through the nose to rent a house because of the housing crisis.

 

These people said the same about joining the Euro but it all turned out to be nonsense, why listen to them now?

 

Im not saying she is necessarily accurate. A lot of the debate here has been about nebulous things like "sovereignty" with the economic consequences portrayed as a price worth paying. Im interested genuinely in how much people would be prepared to give up in order to leave. 1% of income? 5%? 20%.

 

I understand your argument is slightly different because you think you will benefit economically from leaving. I got to say I think you're wrong. Im old enough to remember the 1980s recession - there were almost no EU immigrants but a **** of a lot of unemployment and rock bottom wages. Leaving the EU will probably leave you worse off imo. The migrant labour will disappear, but so will the jobs.

[aintforever]

Im not saying she is necessarily accurate. A lot of the debate here has been about nebulous things like "sovereignty" with the economic consequences portrayed as a price worth paying. Im interested genuinely in how much people would be prepared to give up in order to leave. 1% of income? 5%? 20%.

 

I understand your argument is slightly different because you think you will benefit economically from leaving. I got to say I think you're wrong. Im old enough to remember the 1980s recession - there were almost no EU immigrants but a **** of a lot of unemployment and rock bottom wages. Leaving the EU will probably leave you worse off imo. The migrant labour will disappear, but so will the jobs.

 

I don't think it will make a huge difference to anyone either way to be honest. Leave and there will obviously be some short term impact because markets don't like uncertainty but a deal will be struck and we will still be in the single market. There will be no labour shortage because we will let in who is needed either way.

 

The more these bankers, politicians and big business leaders say we should stay the more I want to vote out. Of course they want an endless supply of cheap labour and a common market, they don't give a **** about the lives of normal people.

[buctootim]

The more these bankers, politicians and big business leaders say we should stay the more I want to vote out. Of course they want an endless supply of cheap labour and a common market, they don't give a **** about the lives of normal people.

 

I think you have to look at whether people have something to gain from expressing an opinion. When CEOs of retailers, coffee shops and call centres say we should stay its clearly because they want cheaper labour and the idea that they would close down and leave the UK market if we were outside the EU is ridiculous. Similarly you can disregard the politicians - they mostly have no background or education in the issues they pontificate about. You do though, imo, have to give more credibility to people like the IMF, Bank of England who have no particular axe to grind and to companies who rely on free access to markets - like the car manufacturers.

[moonraker]

You already know my stance on the opinion of the Governor of the Bank of England, and also the opinions of Cameron and Osborne on their doom and gloom prophecies.

 

If you listened to the conclusion I reached right from the outset, I am content to balance the risks of our leaving the EU against the benefits that I perceive we will gain from trading with the rest of the World unhampered by the restraints of our EU membership. I know that your mind is made up, so please accept my position that although there are risks to the economy either way, it is the several other factors involved in our decision which I consider to weigh more heavily in favour of us leaving.

 

I note that I still have not received an answer to these questions I asked of you:-

 

Should we have total control of our own borders and who we allow to enter our country?

Should our elected Parliament have supremacy over the unelected EU Commission?

Should our Law Courts have supremacy over the European Justice system?

Is the EU becoming too big and unwieldy? Or should it be expanded still further?

Do you approve of our further integration into a Federal United States of Europe?

Does the massive EU bureaucracy imposed on small businesses hamper them?

Would we benefit from the freedom to negotiate our own trade deals with those nations around the World whose economies are developing the fastest?

Should we reclaim our own territorial waters to revitalise our fishing industry?

Is it preferable that the British Government decides how British taxpayers' monies given to the EU is spent, rather than have them decide how our money is distributed back to us?

Does the unlimited free movement of peoples impose massive pressures on our NHS, housing infrastructure and employment sectors?

 

I accept that your position appears to based solely on the economic repercussions which are largely a matter of conjecture anyway, but you don't seem very keen at all to debate these other considerations.

 

rather quick response Here are my answers, your less that objective language makes it quite difficult to offer simple answers but always willing to try.

Should we have total control of our own borders and who we allow to enter our country?

It highly unlikely (balance of probability) that we could achieve this outside of the EU and have access to the EU free market.

 

Should our elected Parliament have supremacy over the unelected EU Commission?

The Commission have no supremacy, as has been well documented they are the equivalent of the EU Civil Service, it is the EU Parliament and Council of Ministers that make decisions.

Should our Law Courts have supremacy over the European Justice system?

Yes, for matters pertaining to EU Rule and Regulations. If you join a club you abide by the rules. Please explain why the European Justice System is unacceptable? We are signed up to many other international judicial bodies.

 

Is the EU becoming too big and unwieldy? Or should it be expanded still further?

Possibly, any further expansion should be treated with great caution, if we leave we will have no influence or veto as to who can join.

 

Do you approve of our further integration into a Federal United States of Europe?

There is no such thing as the Federal United States of Europe. It is simple an hypothesis.

 

Does the massive EU bureaucracy imposed on small businesses hamper them?

I am not sure Massive is an accurate term, complex yes, but then trade and commerce in todays world is complex and it needs regulating. What would you replace it with, all business need to be regulated, and require a bureaucracy to administer and police it. (Note the EU Commission has 16000 staff far less than any comparable organisation).

 

Would we benefit from the freedom to negotiate our own trade deals with those nations around the World whose economies are developing the fastest?

No, we may be the 5th largest economy but are still dwarfed by the USA, CHINA and the EU and therefore I do not buy into the premise that we will somehow be able to get deals any more favourable that those achieved as part of the EU.

 

Should we reclaim our own territorial waters to revitalise our fishing industry?

 

No fish have no nationality, territorial waters are a red herring! Fishing quotas exist to protect fish stocks, how would you achieve that as an isolated jurisdiction?

 

Is it preferable that the British Government decides how British taxpayers' monies given to the EU is spent, rather than have them decide how our money is distributed back to us?

Another red herring, as the EU only accounts for about 1.5% of government spending I think the Government already decide on anything that matters. We also give money to other organisation over whom we do not have any sanctions on how the money is spent.

 

Does the unlimited free movement of peoples impose massive pressures on our NHS, housing infrastructure and employment sectors?

Not proven and I doubt it, any public service should be scaled to meet the needs of the population. Our current population is overwhelmingly made up of UK citizens, and much of our NHS is staffed by migrants.

[CB Fry]

 

The more these bankers, politicians and big business leaders say we should stay the more I want to vote out. Of course they want an endless supply of cheap labour and a common market, they don't give a **** about the lives of normal people.

 

Who's running this post-Brexit utopia if it isn't bankers, politicians and big business leaders?

 

They might not want us to leave now but if we do leave they'll still be there running everything, controlling everything and owning everything. They'll still want cheap labour and they'll want in on the common market. Their giving a **** about the lives of normal people will be the same or less.

 

Come Brexit, they're not going to run away defeated like the bad guys in a He-Man cartoon. They win, whatever.

[solentstars]

Who's running this post-Brexit utopia if it isn't bankers, politicians and big business leaders?

 

They might not want us to leave now but if we do leave they'll still be there running everything, controlling everything and owning everything. They'll still want cheap labour and they'll want in on the common market. Their giving a **** about the lives of normal people will be the same or less.

 

Come Brexit, they're not going to run away defeated like the bad guys in a He-Man cartoon. They win, whatever.

good post and anyone with half a brain knows that except the gullible , you only got to look at the people who fund the leave campaign and the lunitics part of the tory party who want us out ..so they can impose there free markets ideology ,in coded terms that means doing away with workers protection and laws,so they can hire and fire at will with no comeback which will drive down wages big time.the out campaign has lost the economic argument and they know it ,so be prepared for them to play the immigrant card has they become even more desperate.

[derry]

What I find amazing, that the very people that didn't see the collapse of the banks and the recession coming, and forecast consequences if we didn't join the Euro, are now the experts. They are wasting their time, the leave vote is years in the making, it's not about arguments any more, leave voters can't wait to get that cross on the voting slip. Cameron and Osbourne etc can trot out as many cronies as they want, it won't work.

[Whitey Grandad]

Who's running this post-Brexit utopia if it isn't bankers, politicians and big business leaders?

 

They might not want us to leave now but if we do leave they'll still be there running everything, controlling everything and owning everything. They'll still want cheap labour and they'll want in on the common market. Their giving a **** about the lives of normal people will be the same or less.

 

Come Brexit, they're not going to run away defeated like the bad guys in a He-Man cartoon. They win, whatever.

 

Very true. And these are the very people that the dissatisfied should be holding to account for the current state of our country instead of inventing some bogeyman from Europe.

[CB Fry]

What I find amazing, that the very people that didn't see the collapse of the banks and the recession coming, and forecast consequences if we didn't join the Euro, are now the experts. They are wasting their time, the leave vote is years in the making, it's not about arguments any more, leave voters can't wait to get that cross on the voting slip. Cameron and Osbourne etc can trot out as many cronies as they want, it won't work.

 

I think I missed the point in 2007 when Michael Gove, Boris Johnson, Peter Bone and Kate Hoey ("I've always admired her, I have") predicted the global economic crash.

[derry]

I think I missed the point in 2007 when Michael Gove, Boris Johnson, Peter Bone and Kate Hoey ("I've always admired her, I have") predicted the global economic crash.

 

They aren't the interfering foreign politicians recruited by Cameron and Osbourne to try and frighten the voters. It was the Labour party and Gordon Brown that can hold their hands up to that one after ten years in power. As I said who cares what they think. All Cameron is doing with his scare tactics is providing more leave voters who detest his attitude.

[CB Fry]

They aren't the interfering foreign politicians recruited by Cameron and Osbourne to try and frighten the voters. It was the Labour party and Gordon Brown that can hold their hands up to that one after ten years in power. As I said who cares what they think. All Cameron is doing with his scare tactics is providing more leave voters who detest his attitude.

It's brilliant to know all errors of judgement and mistakes by politicians and bankers will be a thing of the past forever the day after Brexit.

[aintforever]

Who's running this post-Brexit utopia if it isn't bankers, politicians and big business leaders?

 

They might not want us to leave now but if we do leave they'll still be there running everything, controlling everything and owning everything. They'll still want cheap labour and they'll want in on the common market. Their giving a **** about the lives of normal people will be the same or less.

 

Come Brexit, they're not going to run away defeated like the bad guys in a He-Man cartoon. They win, whatever.

 

Of course they will run the place, doesn't mean we have to vote the way they say though. Their idea of armegadon is probably their share portfolio dropping a few percent - don't pretend for one moment that they give a **** about the problems caused by the housing crisis, overstretched services etc.

 

The problems caused by mass uncontrolled immigration doesn't and never will effect people like this.

Edited 13 May, 2016 by aintforever

[CB Fry]

Of course they will run the place, doesn't mean we have to vote the way they say though. Their idea of armegadon is probably their share portfolio dropping a few percent - don't pretend for one moment that they give a **** about the problems caused by the housing crisis, overstretched services etc.

 

The problems caused by mass uncontrolled immigration doesn't and never will effect people like this.

 

Who is pretending they give a s#*# about the problems caused by the housing services etc etc? You think the de-regulating right wingers on the Brexit side give a s#$# about it?

 

The most successful con-trick they are pulling is the suggestion that they gave any intention in stopping mass immigration. They really, really don't and really, really won't but it gives a great and easy scapegoat to get people to vote the way they want.

 

You're about eight months away from Prime Minister Boris blustering on the news about "well, we need free movement for a stronger economy and the net benefit outweighs the cost etc etc etc" while explaining how the farm and hospitality lobby have ensured that any "points system" lets in every single Gregorz and Filemina that they need. Every single one.

 

Fascinating that the Brexiteers, most old enough to know better, really don't think the politicians on their side are stringing the people along. They don't "give a s $!×*#" any more than anyone else.

 

The drawbridge ain't coming up folks. It really really isn't.

Edited 13 May, 2016 by CB Fry

[Sour Mash]

Who is pretending they give a s#*# about the problems caused by the housing services etc etc? You think the de-regulating right wingers on the Brexit side give a s#$# about it?

 

The most successful con-trick they are pulling is the suggestion that they gave any intention in stopping mass immigration. They really, really don't and really, really won't but it gives a great and easy scapegoat to get people to vote the way they want.

 

You're about eight months away from Prime Minister Boris blustering on the news about "well, we need free movement for a stronger economy and the net benefit outweighs the cost etc etc etc" while explaining how the farm and hospitality lobby have ensured that any "points system" lets in every single Gregorz and Filemina that they need. Every single one.

 

Fascinating that the Brexiteers, most old enough to know better, really don't think the politicians on their side are stringing the people along. They don't "give a s $!×*#" any more than anyone else.

 

The drawbridge ain't coming up folks. It really really isn't.

That doesn't make sense. If that was the case why didn't we have this level of free movement of labour prior to 2004. Even the most crafty of politicians wouldn't get away with completely ignoring one of the main points they'd just won the biggest referendum in their life time on. I can't think of many 180 degrees policy turn arounds of similar magnitude post election wins.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

What I find amazing, that the very people that didn't see the collapse of the banks and the recession coming, and forecast consequences if we didn't join the Euro, are now the experts. They are wasting their time, the leave vote is years in the making, it's not about arguments any more, leave voters can't wait to get that cross on the voting slip. Cameron and Osbourne etc can trot out as many cronies as they want, it won't work.

 

Well economics I suppose is far from being a exact science and there is always a degree of uncertainity here. The explanation for this is probably related to the sheer complexity, and indeed dynamism, of the subject. However, virtualy ALL the expert evidence we see before us indicates that leaving the EU would - very likley - damage this nation's economic prospects to some meaningful extent. I feel that those among us who still have to go out and earn a living for themselves in this economy are entitled to bare that consideration in mind - as are those who are concerned about their children's future.

 

Think of it this way - if you choose to smoke 100 cigarettes a day for your entire adult life then no doctor can tell you that it is a matter of certainty that you will develop lung cancer or heart disease as a result. But that is what expert opinion will tell you is a likley outcome and methinks only some kind of fool would choose to ignore that advice just because doctors have been known to be wrong in the past.

 

This nation has been comprehensivly advised now by both national and international experts in the field of economics of the potentially grave consequences of voting to leave the EU. Indeed, in many ways this argument is already over and we have now entered a period of waiting before seeing whether the British people choose to follow the advice they have been given, or allow their 'pride and prejudice' to overcome their reason.

 

.

Edited 14 May, 2016 by CHAPEL END CHARLIE

[Kingsland Codger]

The University of Stirling is offering a free online course on the EU Referendum entitled "Remain or Leave". The aim of the course is "to cut through partisan rhetoric and the mass of competing, often contradictory information".

 

http://www.stir.ac.uk/news/2016/05/stirling-launches-eu-referendum-online-course/

 

I'm tempted to sign up.

[OldNick]

good post and anyone with half a brain knows that except the gullible , you only got to look at the people who fund the leave campaign and the lunitics part of the tory party who want us out ..so they can impose there free markets ideology ,in coded terms that means doing away with workers protection and laws,so they can hire and fire at will with no comeback which will drive down wages big time.the out campaign has lost the economic argument and they know it ,so be prepared for them to play the immigrant card has they become even more desperate.

I thought this government had raised the minimum wage, this protects the lower paid surely? Apparently it has made Britain even more desirable to come to.

I believe it is better to stay in ( I absolutely detest the European Parliament and the burn rats there) but it seems common sense to stay.

if we left I expect that the following ten years would be pretty dire as we try and untangle everything,

[Wes Tender]

Well economics I suppose is far from being a exact science and there is always a degree of uncertainity here. The explanation for this is probably related to the sheer complexity, and indeed dynamism, of the subject. However, virtualy ALL the expert evidence we see before us indicates that leaving the EU would - very likley - damage this nation's economic prospects to some meaningful extent. I feel that those among us who still have to go out and earn a living for themselves in this economy are entitled to bare that consideration in mind - as are those who are concerned about their children's future.

 

Think of it this way - if you choose to smoke 100 cigarettes a day for your entire adult life then no doctor can tell you that it is a matter of certainty that you will develop lung cancer or heart disease as a result. But that is what expert opinion will tell you is a likley outcome and methinks only some kind of fool would choose to ignore that advice just because doctors have been known to be wrong in the past.

 

This nation has been comprehensivly advised now by both national and international experts in the field of economics of the potentially grave consequences of voting to leave the EU. Indeed, in many ways this argument is already over and we have now entered a period of waiting before seeing whether the British people choose to follow the advice they have been given, or allow their 'pride and prejudice' to overcome their reason.

 

.

 

Your sheer blatant arrogance is breathtaking once again, it really is becoming insufferable.

 

Will you please stop this assertion of yours that it is only the Remainians who will be voting on behalf of their children's future.

 

Will you also have a look at the other arrogant assertion you make that if they don't follow the advice of the so-called economic experts who advise us to remain in the EU, the Leave voters will be swayed by "pride or prejudice" from arriving at what you consider to be the right decision. It couldn't possibly be that they will remember that these self same "experts" were completely and utterly wrong about whether we should join the Eurozone, could it?

 

And once again, I have to point out that the opinions of your so-called economic experts are not evidence. You really do have a mental block on this to the point of bone-headiness, don't you?

 

Once again, the king of the crap analogy comes up trumps. Everybody knows that smoking is bad for you; there are warnings that it could kill you on every packet. Will you be proposing that there be a warning on every voting slip that leaving the EU could seriously damage our economy? Contrary to the analogy that heavy smokers are extremely likely to kill themselves through smoking, there is no evidence to show that counties leaving the EU or not being in it in the first place, are likely to suffer any adverse effects economically or otherwise. Indeed, Switzerland is out of the EU and is the wealthiest country in the World. However, there are several Countries who are not doing so well economically who are members of the EU.

 

Regarding the economic argument, you are right. It is already over. Dave and Osborne have switched their scaremongering away from the economic argument and towards the likelihood of WW3, and the electorate eagerly await the next apocalypse scenario that will unfold as a result of their crass stupidity should they dare to defy them. They are doing a great job of helping the Leave campaign with these absurd utterances.

[Whitey Grandad]

The University of Stirling is offering a free online course on the EU Referendum entitled "Remain or Leave". The aim of the course is "to cut through partisan rhetoric and the mass of competing, often contradictory information".

 

http://www.stir.ac.uk/news/2016/05/stirling-launches-eu-referendum-online-course/

 

I'm tempted to sign up.

 

I cannot see that as a long-term career.

[Whitey Grandad]

That doesn't make sense. If that was the case why didn't we have this level of free movement of labour prior to 2004. Even the most crafty of politicians wouldn't get away with completely ignoring one of the main points they'd just won the biggest referendum in their life time on. I can't think of many 180 degrees policy turn arounds of similar magnitude post election wins.

 

That's a good question. Immigration was consistently high before 2004 but could it be that there was a large amount or work available in Britain that was low paid and there were no Brits prepared to do it? Suddenly there was an availability of a large pool of labour willing to work for low pay doing jobs in the service industry. Whether this has been good for Britain is a different argument.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Your sheer blatant arrogance is breathtaking once again, it really is becoming insufferable.

 

Will you please stop this assertion of yours that it is only the Remainians who will be voting on behalf of their children's future.

 

Will you also have a look at the other arrogant assertion you make that if they don't follow the advice of the so-called economic experts who advise us to remain in the EU, the Leave voters will be swayed by "pride or prejudice" from arriving at what you consider to be the right decision. It couldn't possibly be that they will remember that these self same "experts" were completely and utterly wrong about whether we should join the Eurozone, could it?

 

And once again, I have to point out that the opinions of your so-called economic experts are not evidence. You really do have a mental block on this to the point of bone-headiness ....

.

 

Your insults kind of wash-over me now as the pettiness of it all disinterests me. However, this behaviour is nevertheless rather telling as to your personality I suppose. As for your seemingly endless complaints .. well you can rest assured that I shall continue to express myself as I see fit to do so without fear or favour to anyone. So then you would appear to find yourself in what might be depicted as a - like it or lump it - type sitution.

 

Re your tiresome habit of rejecting any evidence you find inconvenient to your argument. I can only state that I find this hobby of yours to be both contemptible and risable in equal measure - I guess you already know that. While we are on the subject I can't be the only person on here who is deeply unimpressed with your 'they were wrong about the Euro' argument. That made precious little sense the first time you parroted it months ago and it is not exactly improving with age!

 

You claim again that the fate of our future generations is a matter of some concern for you. But that claim is virtually meaningless as you seem utterly determined to imperil their future. So I can only conclude that this consideration is in fact a matter of little real importance to you. If you could only be a little more honest on here then perhaps you might come across more convincingly too.

 

Furthermore, you say that all the distinguished economists who warn the British people of the dangers we all face are only "so-called" experts - a clear implacation methinks that you question their creditbilty. If that is so then please expand on why you think the Governor of the BoE is somehow unqualified to give his considered opinion on this subject? If he has gone 'out on a limb' here than why have the bank's ENTIRE Monetary Policy Committee also endorsed his findings? No, these people (and the IMF, OECD, etc) are not "so-called" experts, they are in fact leading world authorites on the subject of economics who any reasonable person might consider worth listening to.

 

Finally, and just to show you that I too know how to increase font-size:

 

EXPERT OPINION IS EVIDENCE.

 

.

Edited 14 May, 2016 by CHAPEL END CHARLIE

[hutch]

It is indeed. It is evidence that it is the opinion of the expert. It is not evidence that the expert's opinion is correct.

 

On any given day in the civil courts, around 50% of the expert opinions that are given in evidence are judged to be unreliable.

[buctootim]

around 50% of the expert opinions that are given in evidence are judged to be unreliable.

 

Is that an expert opinion?

[Wes Tender]

Chapel End Charlie: Your insults kind of wash-over me now as the pettiness of it all disinterests me. However, this behaviour is nevertheless rather telling as to your personality I suppose. As for your seemingly endless complaints .. well you can rest assured that I shall continue to express myself as I see fit to do so without fear or favour to anyone. So then you would appear to find yourself in what might be depicted as a - like it or lump it - type sitution.

 

Re your tiresome habit of rejecting any evidence you find inconvenient to your argument. I can only state that I find this hobby of yours to be both contemptible and risable in equal measure - I guess you already know that. While we are on the subject I can't be the only person on here who is deeply unimpressed with your 'they were wrong about the Euro' argument. That made precious little sense the first time you parroted it months ago and it is not exactly improving with age!

 

You claim again that the fate of our future generations is a matter of some concern for you. But that claim is virtually meaningless as you seem utterly determined to imperil their future. So I can only conclude that this consideration is in fact a matter of little real importance to you. If you could only be a little more honest on here then perhaps you might come across more convincingly too.

 

Furthermore, you say that all the distinguished economists who warn the British people of the dangers we all face are only "so-called" experts - a clear implacation methinks that you question their creditbilty. If that is so then please expand on why you think the Governor of the BoE is somehow unqualified to give his considered opinion on this subject? If he has gone 'out on a limb' here than why have the bank's ENTIRE Monetary Policy Committee also endorsed his findings? No, these people (and the IMF, OECD, etc) are not "so-called" experts, they are in fact leading world authorites on the subject of economics who any reasonable person might consider worth listening to.

 

Finally, and just to show you that I too know how to increase font-size:

 

EXPERT OPINION IS EVIDENCE.

 

 

 

Expert opinion might be deemed as evidence in the legal sense. But you don't seem to notice the difference as we are not talking legal situations here, are we? Of course, if you are able to point me in the direction of their forecasts being based on historical precedent of the consequences of another member state leaving the EU, then it would carry some more weight. But I reiterate, economists cannot arrive at any concrete conclusions on how a Brexit might develop, as they cannot know what trade deals we would subsequently make with the EU, or the rest of the World. Making economic projections 14 years into the future like Osborne did, is absolutely absurd, but no doubt you will have hung on his every word, accepting it as the Gospel truth.

 

You can huff and puff all you like about how you dismiss the fact that most of the same economists got it wrong when we didn't go ahead with joining the Eurozone, but although the argument doesn't register with you, happily such things will be picked up by the electorate as evidential (based on past factual occurrences, rather than future predictions) that the economists who predicted those dire consequences then, might conceivably just be wrong once again. Most just accept that the economists are wheeled out by Dave & Co to try and scare the electorate anyway. They don't trust Dave or Osborne, because they remember how gushing he was about how we could survive quite well enough outside of the EU and he said that he would have led the Leave campaign if he didn't get the reforms he demanded.

 

Regarding your totally groundless and arrogant assertions that anybody who votes for Brexit does not care for the future of their children and grandchildren, I'll counter and assert that I care more for their future than you obviously do, wanting our country to remain in this sclerotic, overly bureaucratic and undemocratic organisation. I want their future to prosper by leaving the EU behind to continue its trajectory towards its inevitable collapse and for the UK to take up the challenge of restoring our once proud trading prowess with the rest of the World.

 

I realise that your position is so entrenched that anything anybody says on the Brexit side washes right over you. Kindly accept that it is therefore permissible to have entrenched views the other way without being ridiculed just because I don't share your opinions. I also ignore all your insults, calling me a piece of work, claiming I don't care for the future of my children, etc.

 

If you really want to froth at the mouth with righteous indignation, I can recommend that you spend an hour watching this:-

 

[Whitey Grandad]

Is that an expert opinion?

 

It's an opinion about experts, and one with which I agree so that makes it 100% accurate

[buctootim]

It's an opinion about experts, and one with which I agree so that makes it 100% accurate

 

If you agree its correct then only 50% accurate surely?

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Expert opinion might be deemed as evidence in the legal sense ....

 

Do you see this my fellow Sainstwebians - after what seems like months of futile attempts to deny the obvious truth our Wes has finally conceeded (with typical bad-grace mind you) that expert testimony is indeed a form of evidence. Not that he is about to take any notice of course ....

 

But HOORAY anyway!

 

This does go to show methinks that if you stick at a job for long enough then you will eventualy get your reward

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

It is indeed. It is evidence that it is the opinion of the expert. It is not evidence that the expert's opinion is correct.

 

On any given day in the civil courts, around 50% of the expert opinions that are given in evidence are judged to be unreliable.

 

But apart from stereotypical 'death and taxes' nothing in life is a 100% reliable is it - not even a VW Golf in my experience.

 

Nevertheless, all the evidence we have points towards leaving the EU being a dangerous, if not foolhardy, move from a economic perspective. Just ask my mate Wes because I know he agrees with me on this.

[aintforever]

Who is pretending they give a s#*# about the problems caused by the housing services etc etc? You think the de-regulating right wingers on the Brexit side give a s#$# about it?

 

The most successful con-trick they are pulling is the suggestion that they gave any intention in stopping mass immigration. They really, really don't and really, really won't but it gives a great and easy scapegoat to get people to vote the way they want.

 

You're about eight months away from Prime Minister Boris blustering on the news about "well, we need free movement for a stronger economy and the net benefit outweighs the cost etc etc etc" while explaining how the farm and hospitality lobby have ensured that any "points system" lets in every single Gregorz and Filemina that they need. Every single one.

 

Fascinating that the Brexiteers, most old enough to know better, really don't think the politicians on their side are stringing the people along. They don't "give a s $!×*#" any more than anyone else.

 

The drawbridge ain't coming up folks. It really really isn't.

 

I don't have much time for the political views of most of the Brexit campaign, I despise the Tories. This vote is nothing to do with all that red v blue ******, nothing to do with the personalities on each side.

 

I just see the problems caused by mass immigration and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it whilst we are in the EU. Wether the economy is marginally better off or out is debatable but that is not the only issue at stake.

 

What is the plan for providing housing and services for the extra 500k odd that will turn up each year if we choose to stay in? That's a city the size of southampton turning up this year, then another one next year, then another one in 2017. All the time we are making cuts to services because we are skint.

Edited 14 May, 2016 by aintforever

[derry]

The point being missed is that it's not about being swayed by one argument or another most voters have already made up their minds. The only thing that can happen with the government spouting outlandish garbage and insulting the voters intelligence is that they will turn uncommitted voters against them and very likely turn off people that might have voted their way.

 

It's not the fact that 'experts' (I hate that word as there is no such thing) are being brought out to spout the government line, it's their incestuous connection with Osborne and Cameron. The US president, assorted Prime Ministers, Lagarde, indicted by the French for negligence a friend of Osborne. The IMF bringing forward it's statement to be before the referendum. The EU postponing it's budget until after the referendum. The EU sitting on new regulations until after the referendum. This sort of thing after years of lying governments of all persuasions has meant that the population has had it with politicians and could be the last straw.

[Batman]

that mental claim that we risk another European war if we leave MUST have had some form of detrimental impact on the remain side

what an insulting statement to make.

 

 

not one person from the remain side has explained how we can possibly cope with 500k EVERY 12 months coming in.

just how can that be sustained?

[LuckyNumber7]

I don't have much time for the political views of most of the Brexit campaign, I despise the Tories. This vote is nothing to do with all that red v blue ******, nothing to do with the personalities on each side.

 

I just see the problems caused by mass immigration and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it whilst we are in the EU. Wether the economy is marginally better off or out is debatable but that is not the only issue at stake.

 

What is the plan for providing housing and services for the extra 500k odd that will turn up each year if we choose to stay in? That's a city the size of southampton turning up this year, then another one next year, then another one in 2017. All the time we are making cuts to services because we are skint.

 

Absolutely agree with this, I'm sick of hearing about the political 'personalities' on both sides. Who supports what side should be completely irrelevant.

My feelings on the economy are that we may well suffer a bit in the short term, but long term would recover and be fine. Likewise immigration is the biggest issue for me and it's imperative that we regain some kind of control over the people and numbers we let in. This is likely our last chance to do so. We are already the second most densely populated country in Europe and even without mass immigration the demand for housing far outweighs supply. As long as the EU insists on freedom of movement there's no way I could ever vote remain.

[Wes Tender]

Do you see this my fellow Sainstwebians - after what seems like months of futile attempts to deny the obvious truth our Wes has finally conceeded (with typical bad-grace mind you) that expert testimony is indeed a form of evidence. Not that he is about to take any notice of course ....

 

But HOORAY anyway!

 

This does go to show methinks that if you stick at a job for long enough then you will eventualy get your reward

 

Do you see this, fellow Saintswebians? Once again, Chapel End Charlie either does not have the brainpower or the comprehension abilities to make the distinction between evidence (as in expert testimony in the legal field) and evidence in any other spheres, (such as economics) despite me pointing out in my first sentence that it is not the same thing.

 

I've attempted to assist him by pointing out that predictions or forecasts by economists of what might come to pass in the future following a certain course of action cannot possibly be made with absolute certainty. I may have imagined it, but I think he might even have admitted somewhere that Economics isn't an exact science. There are even economists who take the view that Brexit will be beneficial to us, although he dismisses their opinions as irrelevant, much in the same way that he does those from ex-Governors of the Bank of England, ex-chancellors, etc.

 

These economists have no basis of precedent on which to base their forecasts, something that I pointed out to Charles, but he has sought to ignore arguments that hole his ones under the waterline.

 

But if he feels that through his misunderstanding he has achieved some sort of victory, then let's humour him - or pity him.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

Well I'm sorry to see that you are in a bad mood again Wes.

 

Perhaps if you could post with a little less pomposity and a little more lucidity then your temper might improve. It's worth giving it a go surely.

[badgerx16]

not one person from the remain side has explained how we can possibly cope with 500k EVERY 12 months coming in.

just how can that be sustained?

 

Where exactly does that figure come from ? Is it a genuine, provable fact, or another of the random, totally discredited, sh!te statistics that both sides excel in.

[badgerx16]

Of course they will run the place, doesn't mean we have to vote the way they say though........

 

Conspiracy theory 101 - how do you know that the published result of a General Election bears any resemblance to the actual votes cast ?

[buctootim]

Where exactly does that figure come from ? Is it a genuine, provable fact, or another of the random, totally discredited, sh!te statistics that both sides excel in.

 

Its a made up figure - arrived at by including British people returning home after time abroad and disregarding emigration. He also failed to mention that the two biggest sources of immigration are India and China. Thats the Express for you.

Edited 14 May, 2016 by buctootim

[aintforever]

Its a made up figure - arrived at by including British people returning home after time abroad and disregarding emigration. He also failed to mention that the two biggest sources of immigration are India and China. Thats the Express for you.

 

It's a made up figure because we don't have a ****ing clue how many people will turn up, or any way of controlling it.

 

How do you suppose we plan our public services, or plan how many new houses to build?

[Ziggy]

24 out of 26 in the Eurovision. The bastards. Time to leave?

[Wes Tender]

Well I'm sorry to see that you are in a bad mood again Wes.

 

Perhaps if you could post with a little less pomposity and a little more lucidity then your temper might improve. It's worth giving it a go surely.

 

I'm perfectly calm thank you. How did you enjoy Brexit the Movie? Good, wasn't it? When is your lot's movie coming out?

[melmacian_saint]

http://www.global-counsel.co.uk/sites/default/files/special-reports/downloads/Global%20Counsel_Impact_of_Brexit.pdf

 

Very interesting study, and show that there is no such thing as an "Unpopular" Britain in the EU...

 

The UK has healthy, stable relationships with many European countries. Had it tried to use that soft power to push reform, and help other with their agenda, things would've worked out. It is true however that many of those potential allies have found themselves in fights for survival or to try to preserve their own positions within the EU (e.g. the scandinavians and their struggle to avoid joining the Euro, or the Netherlands trying to solve their banking woes).

 

One thing has to be said: without the legislative leverage of Brussels, the UK would've probably become the natural leader of Europe. Which probably explains France and Germany's push for the emergence of the former.