EU Referendum

User avatar
chaggle
Posts: 2366
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: EU Referendum

Post by chaggle » Sat Mar 05, 2016 1:09 am

bindeweede wrote:Good post, Tony. I wish I could have put it as well as you have.
Yes, I've been thinking along those lines and wondering how to articulate it.
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 684
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:52 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: EU Referendum

Post by Abdul Alhazred » Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:52 pm

"They've taken all our fish" would be a good slogan if it were a referendum on joining forces with Dagon.

:mrgreen:
Yes, that one.

User avatar
Ketchup
Posts: 681
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 10:15 pm
Location: Around the bend
Contact:

Re: EU Referendum

Post by Ketchup » Sat Mar 05, 2016 3:49 pm

I wonder if there will be many people voting this way; not 'leavers', not 'remainers', but .....

(To switch to full screen, click the Full screen icon in the bottom corner of the video player.

To exit out of full screen, press Esc on your keyboard or click the Full screen icon again.)

~ Today is the Tomorrow you worried about Yesterday ~

Tony Williams
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:51 pm
Location: Somewhere in England
Contact:

Re: EU Referendum

Post by Tony Williams » Sat Mar 12, 2016 10:45 am

Here's a useful site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-polit ... m-35603388

Every time a politician makes claims for or against EU membership, BBC correspondents analyse their accuracy and/or realism. Boris Johnson doesn't come out of it too well... :roll:

What is noticeable is how often the analysis says "yes, but...."; in other words, the politicians are only picking out the bits of info which suit them, and are ignoring the context. For example, Rees-Mogg stated that "the growth rate of the economy is actually faster from 1948 to 1973 that it is from 1973 to 2012." Quite true, but as Carney responded: "All major, advanced economies experienced more rapid post-World War Two growth than subsequent growth post the oil shock of 72-73." And: "In terms of the relative performance of the UK economy you see two accelerations, first upon accession to the European Community and then in the early to mid '90s upon the formation of the single market." So while Rees-Mogg was obviously implying that the UK's membership of the Common Market/EU held back growth, the evidence suggests that the opposite is true. In other words, he was either incompetent in his examination of the statistics, or deliberately intending to mislead.

Can we please be treated like adults rather than being misled all of the time? Is it absolutely impossible for any politician to comment on this issue without distorting the evidence one way or the other?

User avatar
chaggle
Posts: 2366
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: EU Referendum

Post by chaggle » Sat Mar 12, 2016 11:55 am

Tony Williams wrote:Here's a useful site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-polit ... m-35603388

Every time a politician makes claims for or against EU membership, BBC correspondents analyse their accuracy and/or realism. Boris Johnson doesn't come out of it too well... :roll:

What is noticeable is how often the analysis says "yes, but...."; in other words, the politicians are only picking out the bits of info which suit them, and are ignoring the context. For example, Rees-Mogg stated that "the growth rate of the economy is actually faster from 1948 to 1973 that it is from 1973 to 2012." Quite true, but as Carney responded: "All major, advanced economies experienced more rapid post-World War Two growth than subsequent growth post the oil shock of 72-73." And: "In terms of the relative performance of the UK economy you see two accelerations, first upon accession to the European Community and then in the early to mid '90s upon the formation of the single market." So while Rees-Mogg was obviously implying that the UK's membership of the Common Market/EU held back growth, the evidence suggests that the opposite is true. In other words, he was either incompetent in his examination of the statistics, or deliberately intending to mislead.

Can we please be treated like adults rather than being misled all of the time? Is it absolutely impossible for any politician to comment on this issue without distorting the evidence one way or the other?
That's politics and I'm thoroughly pissed off with the whole business to be honest.

It's all about bias confirmation by cherry-picker - not only in this EU referendum but in politics in general.

What really disappoints me is that so-called skeptics are just as bad as everyone else - any pretense of 'critical thinking' or 'evaluation of evidence' is completely forgotten in the rush to back your own tribe and rubbish the other.

I realise that for now at least it's all we have so we just have to go with it - but there's got to be a better way hasn't there?
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

Darklord
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 5:21 pm

Re: EU Referendum

Post by Darklord » Wed Mar 23, 2016 6:25 am

Hey guys I noticed this hadn't been responded to in a while, so I thought I'd get my current thoughts on the situation out there. Firstly I'm not currently in the UK, I've been overseas for a few months now so apologies in advance for any innaccuracies that may appear but I only get the news 'at arms length' so to speak.

Firstly let me lay out my thoughts and fears for leaving the EU. My thoughts are that the EU, both governments and (most) citizens, see the UK as part of a team. Most EU countries don't wish to see the UK leave the EU. Indeed the French and Polish governments have said that if the UK leaves then they cannot expect any special treatment and there will be repurcussions. Personally I think that there are more EU member states that think along these lines, but have not said so publically.

Like I said, I believe the EU government think of all of its member states as part of a team. A trading team. But it would be just the same if it were a football team, or a military team or whatever. Now if Britain votes to leave? I believe it will be viewed by the EU as 'desertion'. When things have started to get tough, (which it has) Britain has 'cut and run'. I'm sure we all know what happens to deserters when they are brought back, they are usually given some sort of severe punishment and the rest of the team are made aware of it. They are made aware of it so as to try to dissuade them from trying the same. This process works down from the military through other professions right around the world.

So my belief is that should Britain vote to leave? There will be some sort of 'punishment' from the EU. I don't know what that might be? But I believe there will be one.
Some of my thoughts and fears on the issue are listed below, but let me make it clear that I do not claim any of them will happen. I'm not here to spread 'scare stories' I merely wish to list my own personal fears as to what may happen. I believe that there will be some sort of punishment because the EU can't afford to have other member states leave and think they can 'get away' without any repurcussion. To do nothing would invite total collapse of the EU in a very short time. This is why I think Britain will receive some sort of punishment should it choose to leave.

Firstly, as retaliation the EU could introduce trade tariffs on our exported goods. This I think most likely as it is a standard practice throughout the world.
If they decided to be a bit rougher they could introduce a 'trade embargo' I doubt this would happen but it is on my mind.

There are those in the 'out' camp who I've seen post many times claiming that there won't be any trade tariffs because they need us just as much as we need them. That is not, (as I see it) strictly true. I don't know of any goods that we produce in the UK that could not be, or is not currently being, produced in at least one other EU country. However the reverse is not true. There are plenty of goods that are produced in the EU, which are not produced, or capable of being produced, in the UK. So the result I see, is that it WOULD hurt the UK more than the EU if one of the above two options were implemented.

My next fear is that the average EU consumer, (just like you and me) would decide to boycott UK goods. This again would have serious consequences for Britain and it's industries. Or indeed those same EU citizens would decide to boycott holidays to the UK. This would decimate the UK tourist industry and cause countless thousands of tourist and hospitality workers to lose their jobs. Scenarios like the last two could well be implemented even without any 'official' declaration from the EU government or it's member state parliaments. But would, (according to the strength of feeling of EU citizens) have a devastating impact on the tourist industry of the UK.

So that in a nutshell, (if you can call it that?) are my personal fears of what could happen to Britain if we vote to leave.

Anyone thought of what happens to the EU citizens currently working here if we decide to come out? Legally they will become 'illegal workers' overnight. They will be classed as workers from overseas and as such require a visa to work. Not only that, but they also lose their entitlements to sick pay, maternity pay, unemployment benefit, (should they lose their jobs) and many other benefits that they will have been used to for the number of years they had been working here.
What happens to their pension contributions? Under EU regulations their native country can apply to Britain for the pension contributions in order to make up any losses incurred in their native country while they were working abroad. Obviously the same rule applies to UK citizens who have worked in the EU for a period of years too.

Upon leaving, there is no law to ensure these people receive the pension contributions they may have paid. There are a lot of things to iron out should we vote to leave. Think of how many will be upset and angry at suddenly losing these 'rights', (as they have seen them for the past few years) overnight, and then realising that they just may have lost a substantial amount of their pension contributions too! Sure the UK government may give 'assurances' that they will get what is owed to them. But rules would also have to be changed in the EU to allow for that, and 'assurances' as we all know, in the world of politics mean 'nothing'.

In respect of that. How many of these workers would simply 'give up' and either leave for home or for another EU country? For some of the 'out' camp that's great news. But just think for a minute. There are around 50,000 EU citizens registered as nurses. We are already short of nurses by around 24,000. What if suddenly overnight 10,000 of these EU nurses were to leave? What if more were to leave? The NHS would cease to be able to function. Hospitals would have to close, or at least several wards in larger hospitals would. Then there are thousands of EU doctors, dentists, vets the list goes on and that just covers the medical profession.
We can't replace these people overnight. Even if there are enough unemployed people to fill every vacancy, they are not trained or skilled enough to be able to carry out many jobs that some of the EU workers carry out day-to-day.

These guys, are my own personal fears. Sorry for the lengthy 'rant'. But I am genuinely concerned about what will happen to our country. Every time I see someone posting something along the lines of what I have just written, I see a 'standard' reply from someone in the 'out' camp simply stating, 'Rubbish'. I have never seen any logical argument which has convinced me that by voting out Britain would be better off than voting in.

No-one has satisfactorily explained to me how any of the points I raise above WOULD be overcome and bettered by leaving.

No-one has explained who exactly Britain will trade with to replace the lost, (or partially lost) value of trade that we will probably lose, ( which certain EU states, and the US have said) by leaving. The US have already stated that we will not get a special trade deal with them and our goods will attract a trade tariff. So who exactly do these 'outers' think Britain will trade with when we leave?

China? They have their own problems, their economy has taken a down turn lately and they are trying to boost exports while cutting imports. So not really.
EU and the US I've alread mentioned and we're trying to cover their loss to us.
Russia? Not much hope there. Their economy has bottomed due to the oil price drop. Plenty of their workers and military are owed weeks or months of back pay.
India? Good choice, but we're not exactly in their good books at the moment. We used to give them £1billion per year in aid, but that stopped last year. I doubt they'll be in a hurry to bail us out.
Brazil? A big country, but again their economy is not up to trading with us to the tune of £200+ billion per year to make up the loss.
Australia? Now there's a bit of hope there. However with only around 23 million citizens they would hardly buy up enough of our exports to compensate for over 750 million citizens. (EU and US)

So I really don't understand where these 'outers' believe we will be better off out of the EU than in?

The choice at the end of the day, is down to the people. But I think there is a LOT of information that needs to be put out there and be considered, before ANYONE is able to make any sort of reliable decision.

Thanks for reading if you got this far?

Tony Williams
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:51 pm
Location: Somewhere in England
Contact:

Re: EU Referendum

Post by Tony Williams » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:46 am

I think that some of your concerns wouldn't be quite such a problem as you imagine, because IIRC there would be a mandatory two-year period between the UK deciding on Brexit and the changes taking effect. So nothing will change overnight. And the status of EU citizens living in the UK would obviously be very high on the agenda for sorting out.

I also doubt that the EU would 'cut off its nose to spite its face' in terms of punishing the UK - as I posted earlier, I think they would reach agreements which suit them as well as us. However, there would be zero goodwill - they would do us no favours at all.

The point you make about EU citizens informally boycotting UK goods, holidays etc is a good one, and not one that I've seen raised. I must admit we did get in a couple of holidays in Scotland before the 2014 referendum, on the grounds that we probably wouldn't want to go again if they left, and we were thinking of replacing Scotch whisky with equivalents from elsewhere in the UK...

I do agree with you that while there are risks and unknowns whether we stay or leave, there are a lot more of them if we leave.

User avatar
chaggle
Posts: 2366
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: EU Referendum

Post by chaggle » Wed Mar 23, 2016 9:06 am

I read it all. :y

What a Brexiter would say is simply that you are scaremongering and you have no idea that any of those things would happen.

If they could be bothered they would probably then go on to talk about immigration, gravy trains, bent bananas and The War.

One thing you mention is the Brexiters' oft-repeated fallacy that 'they need our trade more than we need theirs'. This comes from the fact that they export more to us than we do to them in absolute terms. It's laughable. The truth is that 50% of our trade is with the EU and only 7% of theirs is with us. We have relatively far more to lose.
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

Darklord
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 5:21 pm

Re: EU Referendum

Post by Darklord » Wed Mar 23, 2016 11:20 am

chaggle wrote:I read it all. :y

What a Brexiter would say is simply that you are scaremongering and you have no idea that any of those things would happen.

If they could be bothered they would probably then go on to talk about immigration, gravy trains, bent bananas and The War.

One thing you mention is the Brexiters' oft-repeated fallacy that 'they need our trade more than we need theirs'. This comes from the fact that they export more to us than we do to them in absolute terms. It's laughable. The truth is that 50% of our trade is with the EU and only 7% of theirs is with us. We have relatively far more to lose.
Exactly my point, (or one of them) They have no logical argument to counter the probabilities or possibilities hence the usual reply of 'scaremongering' or 'rubbish'. Just because they are called 'scaremongering' or 'rubbish' doesn't mean they are wrong. It simply means that the person posting the reply doesn't accept the possibility or probablity. Likewise it doesn't mean that their 'scaremongering' or 'rubbish' reply is correct either.

That's an interesting fact that I didn't know about the relevent percentages of trade. :)

User avatar
bindeweede
Site Admin
Posts: 3450
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 3:45 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, UK

Re: EU Referendum

Post by bindeweede » Thu Mar 24, 2016 1:31 pm

Interesting article from UK Polling Report.
As you’ll see, there’s a clear pattern here: polls of leaders of big business (and polls of membership organisations that are dominated by business) tend to be overwhelmingly pro-European. However, polls conducted of small and medium businesses (or surveys of organisations that are dominated by small and medium businesses) tend to have a more even split. That said, even polls of small businesses still generally find the balance of opinion in favour of remaining.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/9541

Tony Williams
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:51 pm
Location: Somewhere in England
Contact:

Re: EU Referendum

Post by Tony Williams » Sat Apr 16, 2016 2:09 pm

So Boris Johnson is making a pre-emptive strike against the US President for anything he may say about Brexit:
The London mayor, who backs EU exit, told the BBC the Americans "wouldn't dream of sharing [their] sovereignty" as the UK had done.
Perhaps someone should remind the twit that the original states which came together to create the USA voluntarily agreed to share their sovereignty with each other, and still enjoy a relatively high level of autonomy to this day.

Croydon13013
Posts: 1401
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:48 pm

Re: EU Referendum

Post by Croydon13013 » Sun Apr 17, 2016 4:51 pm

Tony Williams wrote: Perhaps someone should remind the twit that the original states which came together to create the USA voluntarily agreed to share their sovereignty with each other, and still enjoy a relatively high level of autonomy to this day.
Yes, I absolutely agree. Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson has been wrong every single time he has opened his mouth on Europe. Trying to suggest that a country made up of 50 different states "wouldn't dream of sharing sovereignty" is total idiocy. Obama was born in Hawaii which joined the USA in 1959, only two years before his birth.

There is also: The North American Free Trade Agreement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Ame ... _Agreement) which is something like the European Common Market and could be a first step towards closer working with Mexico and Canada.
thIS sIGnaTure iS an

Tony Williams
Posts: 1294
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:51 pm
Location: Somewhere in England
Contact:

Re: EU Referendum

Post by Tony Williams » Mon Apr 18, 2016 9:32 am

The "race for the bottom" continues, with the Remain team making ever sillier claims to try to match the Leavers: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-e ... m-36070761
The UK would be "permanently poorer" outside the European Union, Chancellor George Osborne has warned ahead of the in-out vote on membership on 23 June.
A Treasury analysis on the cost of an EU exit will say UK national income could be 6% smaller - the equivalent of £4,300 a year per household - by 2030.
Mr Osborne said the report, being published on Monday, "steps away from the rhetoric" and sets out the facts.
Notice the key words "could be" - yes, it could be smaller, it could be larger, but to call any particular figure for 2030 a "fact" is absurd.

Also notice what happens next:
Mr Osborne defended the report's findings on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, saying: "The conclusions could not be clearer. Britain would be permanently poorer if we left the EU to the tune of £4,300 for every household in the country. That's a fact everyone should think about "
Notice how "could be" shifts to "would be" - which is even less of a fact.

There are still three months to go and rational debate has already fled the country in despair.

User avatar
chaggle
Posts: 2366
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:01 am

Re: EU Referendum

Post by chaggle » Mon Apr 18, 2016 9:42 am

Yup - I've given up debating it. I just take the piss out of both sides' rubbish arguments now.

I shall vote remain because of gut feel.

Absolutely no way to decide something so important.
Don't blame me - I voted remain :con

User avatar
polomint38
Posts: 657
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 7:45 pm

Re: EU Referendum

Post by polomint38 » Mon Apr 18, 2016 10:47 am

When I was on jury service one of the jurors said, "both sides are lying, we just have to work out who is lying the most."

Seems quite apt here.

Post Reply